The Court declined to make a gross sum costs order in favour of a self-represented plaintiff against the DPP following discontinuance of related Local Court proceedings, holding that the plaintiff's costs entitlement was limited to disbursements (per Bell Lawyers v Pentelow) and that no gross sum order could fairly be made under s 98(4)(c) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 in the absence of any evidence quantifying those disbursements. Applying the Lai Qin principles, the Court found neither party had acted unreasonably and ordered that there be no order as to costs for the period the DPP was a party.
The full text is available to signed-in members.