Arjunan v Neighbourhood Association No DP 285853

EX TEMPORE Judgment (REVISED)

1. This is a notice of motion filed by the plaintiffs seeking orders as follows: 1. Effectively, a declaration that the appointment of Grace Lawyers to represent the defendant was not valid and therefore Grace Lawyers cannot represent the defendant; 2. Grace Lawyers purported to act for the defendant without authority and therefore their legal costs claim be dismissed including the legal costs for these proceedings and the proceedings with the Local Court; 3. The defendant to pay the plaintiffs' costs of and incidental to this motion and summons; and 4. Such other orders as the Court considers to be necessary or appropriate.
2. I interpolate that part of the second order sought, being or relating to the legal costs for the proceedings in the Local Court, would appear at least to have some, if not some significant, crossover with the relief sought in the summons initiating the substantive proceedings, in relation to which this notice of motion is a preliminary skirmish.
3. It is necessary briefly to indicate that the summons filed back on 29 December 2021 is, in essence, an appeal against a decision made by the Local Court. The orders sought in the summons are that the appeal from the magistrate be allowed, that her Honour's orders and judgment be set aside, and that the cost claim awarded in the Court below be dismissed. The fourth order sought in the summons, which is very much related to the third, if not a particular of that order, is that the legal costs and claim of $28,348 be dismissed.
4. The background to that cause of action appears, on the material I have been taken to on the notice of motion, to arise from what was initially a dispute between the present plaintiffs and the owners association known as the Neighbourhood Association No DP 285853, which is the respondent, or more particularly the defendant in the substantive proceedings. The details of that dispute are not entirely apparent to me on the material relevant to the notice of motion, and nor should I really enter into the debate in relation to that, but at least on the plaintiffs' case what was a small debt allegedly owed by them to the defendant in the amount of approximately $500, or perhaps if you take into account some other associated costs and expenses something like $2,000, resulted ultimately in legal costs somewhere in the vicinity of $30,000. As I said, it is not for me to enter into the rights and wrongs of that, but it does on its face seem rather extraordinary; but, litigation is costly and those who take it on do so hopefully aware of the risks involved.