› Service of summons for taxation and bill of costs
Practice and procedure
› Service
› Ordinary service by email — actual notice — procedural irregularity
Practice and procedure
› Procedural fairness
› Notice and opportunity to be heard — amended bill of costs not served
Quick Take
1Non-compliance with a procedural rule requiring proof of service by affidavit before taxation proceeds (r 63.45(7)) constitutes an irregularity under rr 2.01 and 2.03 of the Supreme Court Rules 1987 (NT) and does not automatically render the taxation a nullity; the court must assess the nature of the irregularity, resulting prejudice, party conduct and the overall interests of justice.
2Where a party had actual notice of taxation proceedings, was afforded opportunities to object and participate, invoked the reconsideration mechanism but did not pursue the available review process, and allowed approximately three years to elapse before challenging the determinations, the public interest in finality strongly weighs against reopening the taxation.
3Medical evidence relied upon to justify non-attendance or to set aside orders made in a party's absence must demonstrate not merely the existence of illness but a clear nexus between the condition and the asserted inability to participate effectively in the proceeding; generic assertions of unfitness are insufficient.
