Shaw v Yarranova Pty Ltd & Anor

[2011] VSCA 55

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Costs
2. › Indemnity principle
3. › Third party payment of successful party's costs
4. › Parent company indemnifying subsidiary
5. › Whether indemnity rule displaced
6. › Presumption of retainer
7. › Co-existing obligations to pay solicitors' costs
1. Costs
2. › Taxation of costs
3. › Review of Costs Judge assessment
4. › Production of documents
5. › Whether invoices and indicia of payment should be ordered
6. › Legitimate forensic purpose
7. › Whether documents likely to materially assist applicant's case
1. Costs
2. › Taxation of costs
3. › Bill of costs
4. › Whether bill must be signed by solicitor
5. › Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2005 (Vic), r 63.42
1. Costs
2. › Taxation of costs
3. › Disclosure requirements
4. › Legal Practice Act 1996 (Vic)
5. › Whether non-compliance constitutes special circumstance for further assessment
6. › Legal Practice Act 1996 (Vic), s 116

Quick Take

The indemnity principle is not displaced merely because a parent company pays the legal costs of its subsidiary companies. A strong presumption of retainer exists between a solicitor on the record and the party for whom they act, and the onus lies on the party challenging the retainer to prove that under no circumstances does the client have any liability to pay costs. An application for production of invoices and payment documents in costs proceedings requires an evidentiary foundation showing it is 'on the cards' that the documents will materially assist the applicant's case; absent such foundation, the application is a fishing expedition.