Legal Practitioners Act 1981

On application by a client, the Supreme Court may order that a costs agreement be set aside if satisfied that the agreement is not fair and reasonable.

In determining whether or not a costs agreement is fair and reasonable, and without limiting the matters to which the Supreme Court can have regard, the Court may have regard to any or all of the following matters:

whether the client was induced to enter into the agreement by the fraud or misrepresentation of the law practice or of any representative of the law practice;

whether any legal practitioner or Australian-registered foreign lawyer acting on behalf of the law practice has been found guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct in relation to the provision of legal services to which the agreement relates;

whether the law practice failed to make any of the disclosures required under Part 3;

the circumstances and the conduct of the parties before and when the agreement was made;

the circumstances and the conduct of the parties in the matters after the agreement was made;

whether and how the agreement addresses the effect on costs of matters and changed circumstances that might foreseeably arise and affect the extent and nature of legal services provided under the agreement;

whether and how billing under the agreement addresses changed circumstances affecting the extent and nature of legal services provided under the agreement.

The Supreme Court may adjourn the hearing of an application under this clause pending the completion of any investigation or determination of any charge in relation to the conduct of any legal practitioner or

If the Supreme Court orders that a costs agreement be set aside, it may make an order in relation to the payment of legal costs the subject of the agreement.

In making an order under subclause (4)—

the Supreme Court must apply the applicable scale of costs (if any) and any applicable recommendations as to the calculation of barristers' costs;

if there is no applicable scale of costs or recommendations—the Court must determine the fair and reasonable legal costs in relation to the work to which the agreement related, taking into account—

the seriousness of the conduct of the law practice or any legal practitioner or Australian-registered foreign lawyer acting on its behalf;

whether or not it was reasonable to carry out the work;

whether or not the work was carried out in a reasonable manner.

In making an order under subclause (4), the Supreme Court may not order the payment of an amount in excess of the amount that the law practice would have been entitled to recover if the costs agreement had not been set aside.

For the purposes of subclause (5), the Supreme Court may have regard to any or all of the following matters:

whether the law practice and any legal practitioner or

any disclosures made by the law practice under

any relevant advertisement as to—

the law practice's costs; or

the skills of the law practice or of any legal practitioner or

the skill, labour and responsibility displayed on the part of the legal practitioner or Australian-registered foreign lawyer responsible for the matter;

the retainer and whether the work done was within the scope of the retainer;

the complexity, novelty or difficulty of the matter;

the quality of the work done;

the place where, and circumstances in which, the work was done;

the time within which the work was required to be done;

any other relevant matter.

The Supreme Court may determine whether or not a costs agreement exists.

The Supreme Court may order the payment of the costs of and incidental to an application under this clause.

In this clause—