The plaintiff sought relief against his ex-wife for allegedly wrongfully dealing with chattels in the Cayman Islands. The proceeding came before Williams J who permanently stayed the proceeding and ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendant’s costs. A costs assessor was appointed pursuant to court order who gave directions concerning the conduct of the assessment. During the assessment, the plaintiff (the costs respondent) asserted these directions were not complied with by the costs assessor, and as a consequence, the plaintiff was denied procedural fairness. The costs assessor invited the parties to request a referral to the court pursuant to rule 717 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld).
The issue before the court was how the costs assessor ought to exercise his discretion. The court held that the UCPR sets out the framework for the conduct of the costs assessment, and consistent with that framework, it was for the cost assessor to determine the process to be followed pursuant to rules 720 and 722 of the UCPR. Ultimately, the court held that the question referred to it pursuant to rule 717 of the UCPR was unsuitable for referral, and the matter was referred back to the costs assessor with no directions.
Acting for the defendant, Christopher Doyle was instructed by HopgoodGanim Lawyers.
The judgment can be read by clicking here
