The Court upheld the Manager of Costs Assessment's decision to extend time by approximately 38 weeks for a law firm to lodge a costs assessment application under s 198(4) of the Legal Profession Uniform Law, finding the delay was explained by ongoing negotiations and parallel litigation, the former client suffered no actionable prejudice, and refusal would have decisively extinguished the firm's right to recover substantial professional costs. The Court also rejected a natural justice challenge based on the failure to afford the client an opportunity to make reply submissions, holding that no practical injustice was established because the client's pre-emptive submissions comprehensively addressed the issues and no new arguments were identified that could reasonably have influenced the outcome. The interaction between s 178 LPUL (consequences of non-compliance with costs disclosure obligations) and the extension of time power was noted but left for the costs assessor to determine in the assessment process itself.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.