ByLawyers News and Updates

Costs agreements – All states

by

Enhancement of By Lawyers costs agreements

All By Lawyers costs agreements have been reviewed, consolidated, and reformatted to ensure they are in strict compliance with all applicable regulatory requirements in each state and territory, and to improve presentation and readability.

A good cost agreement precedent provides transparency, reduces disputes with clients over fees, and ensures that firms get paid. It is important these documents are correct, however, the increasing complexity of cost disclosure requirements makes this difficult. By Lawyers precedents provide firms with accurate and effective costs agreements for all matter types in all jurisdictions.

Summary of key changes

  • A key enhancement is the inclusion of a Terms and Conditions section, which consolidates general information that applies across all matters.
  • All related information has been grouped together to assist with readability and comprehension.
  • A Next steps section has been added, outlining the steps required to be taken by the client to move the engagement forward.
  • The automation in relation to fees, disbursements, and internal expenses has been improved for LEAP users.
  • The scopes of work, now available under each cost agreement on the matter plans, have been enhanced. For LEAP users, scopes of work can be added to a costs agreement via the Insert Clause feature. See Inserting a Clause on the LEAP Community page. Alternatively, all users can simply cut and paste the scope into the precedent.

New categories of costs agreements

The By Lawyers costs agreements have been simplified into 4 categories in most states and territories:

  1. Costs agreement: suitable for most matters.
  2. Costs agreement – Estate administration: specific to applications for probate and letters of administration and administering the estate.
  3. Conditional costs agreement: suitable for litigation such as personal injury claims where the firm agrees to act on a no win no fee basis.
  4. Conditional costs agreement – Uplift fee: suitable for litigation in jurisdictions where the relevant legislation permits an uplift to be applied to the total costs for a successful outcome.

The new costs agreements and scopes of work have been added, as appropriate, to folder A. Getting the matter underway on all matter plans.

101 Costs Answers – ALL STATES

by

101 Costs Answers is the latest addition to the By Lawyers ‘101’ series of helpful reference materials.

Located in the Reference materials folder on every By Lawyers matter plan, this publication contains valuable commentary and precedents on all aspects of legal costs.

The precedents include all of the By Lawyers costs agreements/client services agreements and costs disclosures, drawn together from all By Lawyers publications into a convenient single publication.

The By Lawyers costs agreements are compliant with the strict requirements of the various state laws. They cater for all areas of law, with detailed recitals of the scope of work usually undertaken in each type of matter. This not only defines the retainer but makes it easy for practitioners to produce documents quickly upon engagement.

The 101 Costs Answers commentary includes:

Disclosure requirements

The commentary helps practitioners to navigate some of the more complicated disclosure requirements including regulated costs and the specific obligations for different types of litigation matters. The effect of non-disclosure is also covered.

Disbursements

Commentary on defining and recovering disbursements includes relevant case law and examples. The By Lawyers costs agreements are drafted to clearly identify usual disbursements.

Counsel’s fees

The commentary deals with the contractual relationship between solicitors and barristers as well as disclosure requirements. With the solicitor responsible for payment of counsel’s fees regardless of the solicitor’s agreement with the client, the By Lawyers costs agreements include counsel’s fees as specific disbursements which the client is obliged to pay.

Debt recovery

Where debt recovery is necessary, 101 Costs Answers contains letters of demand and example pleadings to assist with the recovery of costs. There is also detailed commentary on costs assessment procedures and the relevant forms for each state are available on the matter plan.

Like all By Lawyers publications, 101 Costs Answers contains interactive links to relevant legislation and cases, which are always kept updated.

Security of Payments – NSW

by

On 21 October 2019 significant amendments to the Security of Payments legislation commenced in NSW.

Notable amendments to the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payments Act 1999 by the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Amendment Act 2018 include:

  • removal of the term ‘reference date’;
  • new criteria establishing entitlement to receive a progress payment;
  • requirement for a payment claim to state that it is made under the Act;
  • reduction of due date for payment from 30 days to 20 days from service of a payment claim made to a subcontractor;
  • ability for claimant to withdraw an adjudication application; and
  • ability of the Supreme Court to set aside adjudicator’s determination for jurisdictional error.

The By Lawyers Security of Payments commentary, precedents and matter plan have been updated accordingly.

Costs disclosure – Increase of legal rates during a matter

by

Increase of legal rates during a matter

All By Lawyers Costs Agreements and Client Service Agreements have been updated to include a clause notifying a client that legal rates may increase during the course of a matter requiring a revision of the costs estimate provided. This clause provides for 30 days written notice of any proposed changes to legal rates. While such a clause is not required by Legal Profession legislation concerning costs disclosure requirements, providing such notice on initial costs disclosure is considered best practice.

All of our Guides contain Costs Agreements (Client Service Agreements for QLD Guides) within the folder ‘A. Getting the mater underway’. All of our agreements are compliant with the relevant Legal Profession legislation and are reviewed and updated regularly to ensure compliance.

Security of Payments NSW – commentary enhancement

by

The Security of Payments (NSW) commentary has been updated and enhanced. Some of the noteworthy and helpful additions include:

  • Overview: This area of law is still developing, with considerable impact on the way industry participants run their businesses. Many of the reported decisions from NSW courts are directly relevant to Queensland, Victoria, Western Australia and the Northern Territory. South Australia is now set to join the other states in introducing a legislative regime, with the South Australian parliament currently considering security of payment legislation.
  • Residential building work: It is important to note that, subject to some important exceptions, the Act does not apply to a construction contract for residential building work involving an owner builder: see the definition of “dwelling” in clause 3 of Schedule 1 of the Home Building Act 1999.
  • Preparing a payment claim: Principals must pay amounts due under a construction contract on or before the 15th business day after the payment claim is made. Principals, head contractors and subcontractors, as respondents, must now remain vigilant for any payment claim falling within the terms of the Act – the warning words no longer need be added to the claim and, as such, claims will more readily qualify as payment claims, bringing potentially serious consequences.
  • Service of payment claim:  Claimants should keep a record of the time, date and manner of service on the respondent. The time for the respondent to provide the payment schedule runs from the date of receipt of the payment claim. Claimants should keep a record of the time, date and manner of service on the respondent. The time for the respondent to provide the payment schedule runs from the date of receipt of the payment claim. The claimant must be able to evidence the date of service of the payment claim.
  • Adjudication: The Supreme Court in Probuild Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd v Shade Systems Pty Ltd [2016] NSWSC 770 potentially expanded the grounds available to challenge adjudication determinations to include non-jurisdictional errors of law on the face of the record. However  the High Court in Probuild Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd v Shade Systems Pty Ltd [2018] HCA 4 (14 February 2018) has now held that the Security of Payments Act ousted the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to make an order in the nature of certiorari quashing an adjudicator’s determination for non-jurisdictional error of law on the face of the record. Although the Security of Payment Act did not contain an express statement providing that the jurisdiction was ousted, the scheme of the Act disclosed an intention that such review would not be available having regard to the fact that the Act creates an interim entitlement that is determined informally, summarily and quickly, and then summarily enforced without prejudice to parties’ common law rights.

Get on tip of this critical and developing area of law, relevant to clients who conduct businesses in various industries.

By Lawyers Security of Payments guide is a separate publication on our website, or for LEAP users is located in Other Areas of Law – Building and construction disputes.

Connect with us