NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Gorczynski v AWM Dickinson & Son [2005] NSWSC 277
HEARING DATE(S) : 31 March 2005
JUDGMENT DATE : 6 April 2005
JURISDICTION : Common Law Division
JUDGMENT OF : Master Harrison
DECISION : (1) The appeal is dismissed; (2) Leave to appeal is refused; (3) The determination of the Costs Review Panel dated 9 September 2003 is affirmed; (4) The amended summons filed 3 December 2004 is dismissed; (5) The plaintiff is to pay the defendant's costs as agreed or assessed.
CATCHWORDS : Appeal decision of Review Panel - two bills of costs - the second one being for a higher amount - adequacy of reasons
LEGISLATION CITED : Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 208L
Bowen & Ors t/as Duffield & Duffield Solicitors v Campbell & Anor (NSWSC, 2 December 1997, unreported) CDJ v VAJ [1998] HCA 67 Chapmans Ltd v Yandell (t/as Yandells) [1999] NSWCA 361 Coulter v Regina (1988) 164 CLR 350 CASES CITED : Croker v Commissioner of Taxation [2001] NSWSC 188 Florence Investments Pty Ltd v H G Slater & Co [1975] 2 NSWLR 398 Larsen v Vile [1999] NSWCA 397 Madden v NSW IMC [1999] NSWSC 196
Peter Francis Gorczynski (Plaintiff) PARTIES : Bruce Wallace Arnold Dickinson & Andrew Wallace Bruce Dickinson t/as AWM Dickinson & Son
FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 13358/2004
Mr M L Brabazon (Plaintiff) COUNSEL : Mr J Gruzman (Defendant)
Mr M Cassin, Brian Muir & Company (Plaintiff) SOLICITORS : Mr A Dickinson, AWM Dickinson & Son (Defendant)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate