Mr Smith alleged the matter “should not have ever progressed any further than the cost of preparing and sending a threatening letter of demand” and insisted he was “already ill” when the matter was pursued through the Federal Circuit Court and Federal Court.

During oral submissions, Mr Smith said if he had been advised by his lawyers when he first retained them that the legal costs could reach such a high number, “he would have walked away”.

Among his other submissions, Mr Smith alleged FBC “charged excessive fees and duplicated work” and accused the firm of doubling up its costs between two of its solicitors.

Mr Smith alleged he was charged for a six-hour meeting in July 2018 for what he said was only a three-hour meeting.

In response, partner Brittany Byrne said that although there were occasions where two solicitors attended a meeting, there was no duplication as opposed to “necessary work in the usual conduct”.

In the judgment, Judge Suzanne Sheridan found there was “insufficient evidence” to indicate there had been any overcharging, and it was more likely the costs were the “hallmark of being the product of proceedings which simply became expensive”.

Evidence before the court also indicated there were a number of steps that needed to be taken to advance the proceedings.

“It is unfortunate that this occurred and that the costs expanded with the additional steps required to bring the claim to a successful conclusion,” Judge Sheridan said.

“The judgment amount ultimately obtained indicates that it was reasonable to prosecute the claim beyond a letter of demand.”