High Court of Australia

Cachia v Hanes (1991) 23 NSWLR 304

cf Minister for Aboriginal Affairs v Peko-Wallsend Ltd (1986) 162 CLR 24 at 39 ; 66 ALR 299

cf Santos Ltd v Saunders (1988) 49 SASR 556 at 563, 570-1

6 Edw I c 1

Coke, Second part of the Institutes of the Laws of England , p 288. See also Howes v Barber (1852) 18 QB 588 at 592 ; 118 ER 222 at 224 Dowdell v Australian Royal Mail Steam Navigation Co (1854) 3 El & Bl 902 at 906 ; 118 ER 1379 at 1381

(1884) 13 QBD 872

ibid at 875

ibid at 877

(1976) 136 CLR 47; 12 ALR 271

[1911] KB 87 and 836

(1976) 136 CLR at 51; 12 ALR at 274

Note, in so far as New South Wales is concerned, the express references to a solicitor acting for himself in Table 2 of Sch G from the introduction of Table 2 by an amendment to the Supreme Court Rules (Gaz 70 of 7 July 1972) until the amendment of the Table by a Determination of the Legal Fees and Costs Board (Gaz 49 of 21 May 1993)

[1970] 1 QB 27

ibid at 29

ibid at 37-8

The problem is well documented in the United States: see Mueller, "Abusive pro se Plaintiffs in the Federal Courts: Proposals for Judicial Control'' (1984) 18 Journal of Law Reform 93 at 101; Rubin, "The Civil Pro Se Litigant v The Legal System'' (1989) 20 Loyola University Law Journal 999; Gillies, "Who's Afraid of the Sanction Wolf: Imposing Sanctions on pro se Litigants'' (1989) 11 Cardozo Law Review 173

See Powles, "Litigant in Person -- Discussion Paper'' in Australian Institute of Judicial Administration, The Litigant in Person (1993) 7 at 10-11

cf British Columbia, Law Reform Commission, Report on Civil Procedure : Pt 1 -- Costs of Successful Unassisted Lay Litigants (1975); South Australia, Law Reform Committee, Report Relating to the Award of Costs to a Litigant Appearing in Person (1974)

See Kerridge v Foley (SC(NSW) in Eq, 19 August 1970, unreported); Secretary, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade v Boswell (1992) 111 ALR 553; cf Petrunic v Barnes [1989] VR 927; Australian Blue Metal Ltd v Hughes [1970] 2 NSWR 119

Cachia v Hanes (1991) 23 NSWLR 304 at 305

See generally, The Litigant in Person , Australian Institute of Judicial Administration (1993)

Categories 3 and 4 above

Categories 1 and 2 above

Cachia v Hanes (1991) 23 NSWLR at 317

ibid

ibid at 308

The scope of such a provision was considered in Knight v FP Special Assets Ltd (1992) 174 CLR 178 ; 107 ALR 585

Pt 52, r 23(1) provides that "Costs shall be taxed on a party and party basis'' except in certain specified circumstances which do not apply in this case

1278, (UK) 6 Edw I, c 1

Second part of the Institutes of the Laws of England , p 288

23 March 1989, unreported

ibid at 8

(1884) 12 QBD 452; affd (1884) 13 QBD 872

(1884) 12 QBD at 455 per Denman J

[1970] 1 QB 27

ibid at 35

Report on Civil Procedure, Pt 1 -- Costs of Successful Unassisted Lay Litigants (1975), p 11

(1991) 23 NSWLR at 310

(1976) 136 CLR 47; 12 ALR 271

ibid at CLR 51; ALR 274

[1989] VR 927

O 63, r 69 of the General Rules of Procedure in Civil Proceedings 1986 (Vic)

[1989] VR at 929-30

(1992) 111 ALR 553

O 62, r 8

(1992) 111 ALR at 557

ibid at 560

ibid at 557

(1991) 23 NSWLR at 316

See the Litigants in Person (Costs and Expenses) Act 1975 (UK)

(1991) 23 NSWLR at 311

ibid at 317

See Twenty-ninth Report, Relating to the Award of Costs to a Litigant Appearing in Person (1974), p 5

See Report of British Columbia Law Reform Commission, op cit, pp 17-20

ibid at 19

ibid, by way of support for its proposal for tariff costs notwithstanding that a lay litigant may recover more than the detriment which he or she suffered in the preparation and conduct of the trial

ibid

Cachia v Hanes (1991) 23 NSWLR at 315