Printing of emails for the file justified within reason.

Chapman v Harris [2019] QDC47

COSTS –Assessment –review of assessment under Legal Profession Act 2007 – approach to review – operation of time charging costs agreement – consideration of decision of assessor on certain items - costs of assessment – purpose and effect of statutory provision – event of assessment – whether discretion miscarried – provisional re-exercise of discretion

The Defendant/Applicant applied for an Assessment of Solicitor and Own Client professional fees. The Plaintiff/Respondent rendered fees on the Defendant/Applicant in the Order of $674,249.54 however on Assessment this was reduced to $263,475.74including a deduction of $117,043.95 for the Costs of the Assessment. The Plaintiff/Respondent applied to the Court for a review of the Costs Assessment. Judge McGill upheld the Assessment but increasing it from $358,600.37 to $362,462.40 being a 1% increase. There was a significant review of the items, however for the purpose of this case note these individual items will not be considered. This case note will focus on the printing of emails for the file and the Costs of the Assessment.

Printing of emails

His Honour found that it is reasonable for the printing of an email for the Solicitors file if it is important. His honour found that it is not reasonable to print emails that “was too trivial to justify inclusion of a permanent file” or emails that would otherwise be “formal”/ emails otherwise merely forwarding of documents. On a practical sense this would be impossible to distinguish. [13] & [14].

However considering the use of electronic practice management systems where there is no requirement to print emails for the file, the justification for the printing of emails might be rendered null.

Costs of the Assessment.

His honour also undertook an extensive review of the case law in respect to “Costs of the Assessment”. His Honour noted the Plaintiff/Respondent’s submissions that most of the objections was not allowed but noted that the Costs Assessor considered the objections as helpful and added the timely completion of the Assessment. His Honour noted that the file was poor and that this added to the Costs of the Assessment as the Costs Assessor needed to spend considerable time looking for documents not any coherent order. His Honour found no basis that the Solicitors should not pay for the additional costs of locating these documents with the Costs Assessor charges by the hour as is the Costs of Assessment under the 15% rule.

But ultimately His Honour upheld the Costs Assessors reasoning and found that there was no miscarriage of the Costs Assessor general discretion.