Event and Time
Event Description
This case involves an appeal by Mr. Cansdall, represented by James McConvill & Associates, regarding family law matters that culminated in the dismissal of two appeals on 19 November 2020. Following the dismissal, Ms. Cansdall sought indemnity costs against the appellant's solicitors due to their conduct during the appeals and their failure to advise appropriately on the likelihood of success.
Application and Claims
- Claimant: Ms. Cansdall (the wife) seeks indemnity costs against her husband’s solicitors, James McConvill & Associates.
- Amount: Costs sought total $31,105.50.
- Grounds: The application is based on the argument that the appeals were pursued despite having no chance of success, and the solicitors failed to act in the husband's best interests by not advising him appropriately.
Judicial Decisions
- The court granted the wife's application for indemnity costs against James McConvill & Associates, ordering them to pay the costs fixed at $31,105.50. The court identified a significant breach of duty by the appellant’s solicitors for continuing with the appeals without sufficient merit.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Appellant’s Argument:
- Claims to have been poorly advised but did not provide adequate file notes or evidence during the trial to substantiate this. - The solicitors contended that they sought to defend the appeals vigorously despite apparent flaws.
- Respondent’s Argument:
- Argues that the appeals were incompetent and lacked any genuine prospects of success from the outset. - Evidence was presented that the respondent's solicitors communicated effectively about the flaws in the appeals, suggesting a strong basis for indemnity costs. - The failure of the husband's solicitors to ensure his attendance at the hearing contributed to unnecessary adjournments and wasted costs.