61Costs due to delay or misconduct of practitioner

### 61 Costs due to delay or misconduct of practitioner > > (1)  If in any proceeding it appears to the Court or a judge that a person has incurred costs improperly or without any reasonable cause or that, because of any undue delay, misconduct or default by a practitioner, costs properly incurred have proved fruitless to the person incurring them, the Court or judge may require the practitioner of the person to show cause – > > > > > > (a) why costs should not be disallowed as between the practitioner and the client of the practitioner; and > > > > > > > (b) why the practitioner should not repay to the client any costs which the client has been ordered to pay to any other person. > > > (2)  The Court or judge may make any order that the justice of the case requires and may – > > > > > > (a) refer the matter to a taxing officer for inquiry and report; and > > > > > > > (b) direct the practitioner in the first place to show cause before the taxing officer; and > > > > > > > (c) [*\[Rule 61 Subrule (2) amended by S.R. 2008, No. 128, Applied:31 Dec 2008\]*](/view/html/inforce/2008-12-31/sr-2008-128#GS6@Hpa@EN) direct or authorise the Legal Profession Board to attend and take part in the inquiry. > > > (3)  Notice of any proceedings or order under this rule is to be given to the client in any manner the Court or judge directs. > > > (4)  [*\[Rule 61 Subrule (4) amended by S.R. 2008, No. 128, Applied:31 Dec 2008\]*](/view/html/inforce/2008-12-31/sr-2008-128#GS6@Hpb@EN) Any costs incurred by the Legal Profession Board in connection with an inquiry are to be paid by any person, or out of any fund, the Court or a judge directs.