Background
Ljiljana Coshott had been in a long-running dispute with her former solicitors, Stephen Barry and Martin Board. In 2015, the NSW Court of Appeal set aside District and Local Court orders that had added interest to earlier costs-assessment certificates, holding that the courts could not enlarge the deemed judgments beyond the unpaid certified amounts. It ordered Mr Barry and Mr Board to pay 50 per cent of Mrs Coshott’s costs in the appeal and judicial-review proceedings.
Two later costs assessments quantified those entitlements. In April 2026, Mrs Coshott paid the assessment costs for one certificate and filed it in the Supreme Court, where it was treated as a judgment for $35,994. The other certificate had been amended to reduce the assessed amount to $22,164.03 but had not been released because the relevant assessment fees remained unpaid. Mrs Coshott nevertheless sought judgment for $149,529.80, combining the certificates and claimed interest.
The Court’s Holding
Ball JA dismissed the motion with costs. Although the motion had wrongly been filed in Court of Appeal proceedings, the Court dealt with it in the Common Law Division because the parties accepted determination on the papers and no factual dispute required resolution.
The Court held that it lacked power to make the requested order. Under s 368(5) of the Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW), filing a certificate creates a deemed judgment only for unpaid assessed costs; it does not authorise the court to add interest. The existing filed certificate could not be amended by the Supreme Court in that way, and the unreleased amended certificate could not support relief. Any challenge to an assessment had to proceed through the statutory review and appeal mechanisms, not by an appeal to the Court of Appeal or a motion seeking a new judgment.
Key Takeaways
- A filed costs-assessment certificate is enforceable as a deemed judgment only for the unpaid certified amount.
- The court cannot add interest to that deemed judgment through an administrative filing process.
- Challenges to costs assessments must use the review and appeal routes provided by the Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW).
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces the limited function of filing a costs certificate: it facilitates enforcement but does not convert the certificate into an ordinary judgment that can be varied to add amounts such as interest.
For litigants and practitioners, the case underscores the need to ensure interest issues are addressed through the applicable costs-assessment process or pursued by an appropriate action at law, rather than by seeking to amend a deemed judgment.