Powered by
MOMENTUM
MEDIA
An NSW law firm that commenced proceedings against a former client to recover unpaid legal fees was awarded only $20,000 in costs, despite seeking just under $40,000 in total costs and disbursements.
The Supreme Court of NSW has awarded S&A Law, an incorporated law firm, a lump-sum payment of $20,000 in an uncontested debt recovery proceeding against former client Oliver Pasquini.
The ruling, handed down by Justice Elisabeth Peden, followed legal action brought by the firm to recover outstanding fees from Pasquini, a foreign national residing abroad and the former director of its client.
The NSW-based law firm initially sought a gross sum costs order of $35,232.37 in the motion filed on 13 June – comprising $32,143.12 for costs and disbursements incurred during the proceedings, plus an additional $3,089.25 for the costs related to filing the motion.
Peden J agreed that a gross sum costs order was appropriate, particularly given Pasquini’s status as a foreign national who had not participated in the proceedings and was unable to engage in decisions relating to S&A’s costs or any subsequent costs assessment.
However, Her Honour was not convinced that the evidence sufficiently justified the full amount claimed and consequently awarded nearly half of the requested sum.
The court observed that the affidavit evidence provided by principal solicitor Robert Silberstein lacked detailed time records or a breakdown of specific legal tasks.
Although Silberstein explained that the total costs and disbursements amounted to nearly $40,000 based on hourly rates of $700 for himself and $400 for a senior associate, Justice Peden noted there was no explanation as to why such costs were reasonably incurred – particularly given the matter was described as a “very simple and undefended claim in debt”.
The judgment also addressed the broader legal question of whether an incorporated legal practice like S&A Law is entitled to recover costs for legal work carried out by its employed solicitors.
Peden J proceeded on the assumption that S&A Law was entitled to recover such costs, referencing established NSW authorities that support this position.
Applying what she termed a “broad brush” and “impressionistic discount”, Her Honour reduced the compensation sought by S&A Law to $20,000, taking into account the deficiencies in the evidence.
Prior to this, S&A Law had already secured a default judgment against Pasquini on 16 May 2025 for $67,536.46 in unpaid fees, following his failure to respond to or defend the proceedings.
