Commissioner of Income Tax (Qld) v Bank of New South Wales

[1914] HCA 28

18 CLR 207

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

(QUEENSLAND)

THE BANK OF NEW SOUTH WALES

RESPONDENTS. Practice-Costs-Review of taxation - Counsel's fees-Case called on in one State H. C.

and transferred by order of Court to another State for argument-Counsel holding other briefs at same sitting in the latter State.

Where a case has been called on in one State and transferred to another for argument by order of the Court, and there argued by counsel originally briefed, the Registrar ought, on the taxation of the costs, to allow such sums for counsel's fees as will be reasonable, taking into consideration the distance travelled or the length of time counsel are compelled to be absent from their

Where such counsel are briefed in more than one case to be heard at the same sitting that fact should be taken into consideration.

18 CLR 208

H. C OF A. APPLICATION by the respondents for the review of the taxation

of the costs, SO far as regards the fees allowed to counsel, in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Qd.) v. Bank of New South Wales 1. (QD.)

The case was, by the order of the Court, heard in Sydney after having been called on in Brisbane. On the taxation of the respondents' costs the Registrar allowed 35 guineas for leading counsel and 23 guineas for junior counsel, with one refresher.

Feez K.C. and Macgregor, in support of the application. The fees asked for were 100 guineas and 70 guineas respectively. The Registrar allowed on the basis of, say, 25 guineas as the fee on the senior counsel's brief for argument in Brisbane, and then he allowed another 10 guineas for going to Sydney. The briefs were delivered in Brisbane. The taxation of the costs in ques- tion should be reviewed See Western Australian Bank v. Royal Insurance Co. 2.

Stumm K.C. and Wassell, to oppose the application. The extra costs should not be allowed. The case cited by the applicants decides that extra costs should only be allowed when the question in the case is not on a matter of abstract law.

GRIFFITH C.J. I think that an extra fee should be allowed when a case is transferred to another Registry for argument or re-argument-th fee being based upon considerations of what is a reasonable amount to be paid to counsel for travelling and being absent from home for a considerable time. If he is briefed in more than one case to be heard at the same time and place, that fact should also be taken into consideration.

Review directed. Solicitor, for the appellant, T. W. McCawley, Crown Solicitor for Queensland.

Solicitors, for the respondents, Feez, Ruthning &Baynes.

116 C.L.R., 504. 27 C.L.R., 385