Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 23 SEPTEMBER 2019

When enforcing a costs order, are in-house solicitors fees in danger?

The interpretation of this High Court case in relation to legal practices and in-house solicitors may need to be tested.

AustraliaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

The recent High Court decision in the case of Bell Lawyers Pty Ltd v Pentelow1 will have significant ramifications for solicitors (and barristers) being self-represented in their own personal matters. But the question must now become: what does this mean for legal practices and in-house counsel?

Pay me my money!

The High Court of Australia in the Bell Lawyers Pty Ltd v Pentelow case has ruled that self-represented lawyers are not entitled to recover costs 'incurred' on their own behalf in their own legal proceedings.

As a General Rule, a self-represented litigant cannot obtain recompense for the value of their services in a litigation. The exception to this General Rule is the Chorley2 exception which was derived from common law in the UK and allowed solicitors to recover their professional costs for acting in a litigation on their own behalf.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances. Madgwicks is a member of Meritas, one of the world's largest law firm alliances.

See more popular content from