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] 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] 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.