Cherwell Creek Coal Pty Ltd Re, ex parte Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Mines (No. 3) [2017] QLC 22

LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Re Cherwell Creek Coal Pty Ltd, ex parte Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Mines (No. 3) [2017] QLC 22 PARTIES: Cherwell Creek Coal Pty Ltd (ACN 063 763 002) (applicant) v Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Mines (non-party) Substantive Matter Cherwell Creek Coal Pty Ltd (ACN 063 763 002) (applicant) v BHP Queensland Coal Investments Pty Ltd (ACN 098 876 825) QCT Resources Pty Ltd (ACN 010 808 705) BHP Coal Pty Ltd (ACN 010 595 721) QCT Mining Pty Ltd (ACN 010 487 840) Mitsubishi Development Pty Ltd (ACN 009 779 873) QCT Investment Pty Ltd (ACN 010 487 831) Umal Consolidated Pty Ltd (ACN 000 767 386) (respondents) FILE NO/s: MRA1332-08 DIVISION: General Division PROCEEDING: Determination of costs DELIVERED ON: 12 May 2017 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARD ON: Submissions closed 24 February 2017 HEARD AT: Heard on the papers MEMBER: PA Smith -- 1 of 34 -- 2 ORDER/S: The applicant pay the Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Mines its costs and expenses of production of the documents provided to the applicant assessed in the sum of $23,198.41. CATCHWORDS: PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN THE STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – COSTS – non-party disclosure – where Land Court has already made a decision on costs to a certain extent, but allowed the non-party its costs of production of documents – where there is dispute between the parties as to what costs of production are properly claimable PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN THE STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – COSTS – non-party disclosure – assessment of quantum of costs of production of documents Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999, r 249 NJH Pty Ltd v Billabong International Limited [2010] QSC 239 Charlick Trading Pty Ltd v Australian National Railways Commission (1997) 149 ALR 647 Ure v National Mutual Life Association of Australasia Ltd [1999] QSC 010 APPEARANCES: JK Chapple of Counsel (instructed by Holding Redlich) for the applicant. JM Horton QC and Ms A Nicholas of Counsel (instructed by the Crown Solicitor) for the Department of Natural Resources and Mines. [1] On 14 October 2016 I delivered a decision with respect to the costs of complying with a non-party disclosure notice as well as those costs relating to an application to set aside a stay of the notice.1 The underlying facts are set out in the decision and it is unnecessary to repeat them here. In short, I dismissed the costs applications with respect to the application for non-party disclosure made by both the applicant and Department of Natural Resources and Mines (DNRM), but I allowed DNRM its costs and expenses of production of the documents provided to the applicant. [2] There is now dispute between the applicant and DNRM as to the quantum of the costs and expenses of production of the documents. 1 Re Cherwell Creek Coal Pty Ltd, ex parte Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Mines (No 2) [2016] QLC 59. -- 2 of 34 -- 3 [3] Pursuant to the orders of President Kingham, DNRM filed its costs statement together with submissions in support of its claimed costs on 2 February 2017. [4] On 24 February 2017, the applicant filed its Notice of Objection to DNRM’s costs statement together with its submissions. [5] By its submissions, DNRM seeks costs in the total sum of $39,346.76. For its part, the applicant says in its submissions that the costs of production of documents should be fixed in the amount of $1,033.55. [6] Both the applicant and DNRM rely on essentially the same authorities to support their contention as to the amount of costs payable for production of the documents. I note in particular what her Honour Justice Wilson had to say in NJH Pty Ltd v Billabong International Limited & Ors:2 “Non-party disclosure necessarily involves an infringement of the rights of the non-party, and, as it clearly did in this case, it may require the non-party to incur quite substantial time and expense in compliance. The purpose of rule 249 is clearly to provide reasonable monetary compensation for that impost and to provide a mechanism for resolving any dispute about what is reasonable in the circumstances.” [7] As noted by the parties, there is little authority on the scope of what may be allowed as reasonable costs and expenses under r 249 of the UCPR. However, guidance is obtained from decisions such as that of Justice Mansfield in Charlick Trading Pty Ltd v Australian National Railways Commission3. Justice Mansfield was considering the costs of compliance with a subpoena. He had this to say at 649: “In my view [those cases]establish that the scope of the rule is sufficient to encompass, if the expense is otherwise reasonable in the circumstances, the expense incurred in seeking advice as to the validity of the subpoena, including whether to comply with it at all or in part; correspondence or attendances on a party issuing the subpoena, regarding its terms, and including with a view to narrowing or clearly identifying the scope of documents to be produced; advice as to whether documents are confidential or properly subject to claims for privilege; correspondence and attendances and negotiations with the party issuing the subpoena, as to the terms upon which access to the documents should be permitted by the court, including the negotiation of and formulation of any undertakings as to confidentiality; … and steps to ensure that any confidentiality undertakings proposed to be entered into have, in fact, been properly given: [Hadid v Lenfest Communications Inc and Ors (1996) 65 FCR 350]. That list may not be exhaustive.” 2 [2010] QSC 239. 3 (1997) 149 ALR 647. -- 3 of 34 -- 4 [8] In Ure v National Mutual Life Association of Australasia Ltd4 Justice Williams accepted that legal costs could be claimed as reasonable costs of production under the then order 91 rule 119 indicating at [7] that it was appropriate for a non-party to take legal advice to ensure there was a proper basis in law prior to handing over documents to a party in a proceeding. [9] In those circumstances, given the authorities above, one might wonder how there can be such a vast difference between the applicant and DNRM as to the quantum of costs of production in this matter. The reason is that there is dispute as to what costs are legal costs of the application and therefore excluded by the order that I have already made, or production costs and allowed under the order I have made. [10] The applicant asks this Court to consider the issue this way: had DNRM been awarded their costs, then those costs which are now claimed in the cost statement as costs of production would have been sought by the department as costs of the application.5 I cannot agree with the applicant’s submission in their entirety. In my view, had DNRM been successful in its previous costs application, then not only would the costs of the contested application have been recovered by DNRM, but also the cost to DNRM of getting documents ready for production. This becomes very much a chicken and egg situation. [11] DNRM produced a table of costs claimed, numbered from 1 to 146, and gave descriptions of the nature of the cost claimed under each numbered item. The applicant has made its own submissions as to those items which are in dispute; the nature of their disagreement with certain items; and indicated where they agree with other items. [12] Particularly bearing in mind the observations of Justice Wilson in NJH, where I am in doubt as to whether or not an item is properly payable to DNRM, I have exercised my discretion in favour of DNRM due to its status as a non-party. [13] I have decided to give only very short form responses in my determinations with respect to each item claimed. This however does not mean that I have not given careful consideration to each item. I certainly have given as much consideration as 4 [1999] QSC 010. 5 Applicant’s Submissions, paragraph 18. -- 4 of 34 -- 5 possible to each item, in light of the amount of material available to me to properly consider each item. [14] My guiding factors in determining whether or not to exercise my discretion to accept or reject or vary each item has included consideration of a number of factors. [15] To begin with, given the nature of the substantive preceding in this matter and the complexity thereof, I consider it reasonable for DNRM to have engaged Crown Law to assist with the production of documents, and for Crown Law, on limited occasions, to have obtained the assistance of counsel in that regard. However, where those costs are clearly directed towards challenging the notice rather than production of documents, the items have not been allowed. [16] There are large claims for costs of perusal of the documents by Crown Law. I consider all initial perusals reasonable. However, where documents are provided to counsel or perused by Crown Law for the purposes of objecting to the notice, then those costs fall outside of the ambit of reasonable costs of production of the documents. [17] I note that DNRM does not claim the amounts referred to in items 136-146. [18] The following table sets out each item claimed by number and the reasons for the claim; the amount of the claim; the objections and amount contended by the applicant; and my determination. Cost Statement Claims, Objections, and Determinations Item No. Claim and Amount Objections and amount contended for Determination 1. Telephone attendance on Leah Beumer (In-house Lawyer) advising as to service of a Notice of Non-party Disclosure on the Chief Executive of the Department of Natural Resources and Mines (hereinafter referred to as DNRM), informing the Department objected to the scope of the Notice and that the Applicant was seeking Orders requiring compliance with the Notice and had filed Application returnable on 5.12.14, advising as to delivering their files to us (PF 2 units) $57.80 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allow 50% $28.90 2. Telephone attendance on Leah Beumer conferring and receiving detailed instructions on background to the Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Allowed -- 5 of 34 -- 6 proceeding and on subject Notice of Non-party Disclosure (PF 4 units) $115.60 Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 $115.60 3. Perusing Notice of Non-party Disclosure (and annexures A-D thereto) (126 pages) to The Proper Officer, DNRM (1.10.14) (15 pages), Application (10.10.14) and Affidavit of TM Boys (2 pages) and exhibits TMBl-2 thereto (147 pages)(PF 6 units) $173.40 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allow 50% $86.70 4. Perusing (initial) voluminous documents of DNRM contained in box 1 of documents to determine relevant documents for disclosure and drafting draft letter to Applicant’s Solicitors in response to Notice of Non-party Disclosure (PF 14 units) $404.60 Basis of objection - the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $404.60 5. Perusing further voluminous documents of DNRM contained in two boxes to determine relevant documents for disclosure and drafting letter (email) to client advising as to considering boxes of documents, requesting advice as to obtaining any departmental policies during the relevant periods mentioned in the Notice (PF 22 units) $635 .80 Basis of objection - the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $635.80 6. Drafting amendments to draft letter to Applicant’ s Solicitors in response to the Notice of Non-party Disclosure (PF 8 units) $231 .20 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $231.20 7. Telephone attendance on Leah Beumer conferring and advising on proposed response to Applicant’s Solicitors and as to briefing Jonathan Horton QC (PF 1 unit) Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s Allowed -- 6 of 34 -- 7 $28.90 application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 $28.90 8. Telephone attendance on Jonathan Horton QC conferring on Notice of Non- party Disclosure and requirements for response and nature of the proceeding (PF 2 units) $57.80 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $57.80 9. Perusing letter (email) from Leah Beumer providing instructions to Brief Jonathan Horton QC in the matter, advising as to endeavouring to locate relevant policy documents, letter (email) to Leah Beumer advising as to brief discussion with Jonathan Horton QC yesterday as to briefing him, telephone attendance on Jonathan Horton QC appointing time to confer today (PF 2 units) $57.80 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $57.80 10. Attending Jonathan Horton QC conferring and receiving his advices on response to Notice of Non-party Disclosure and on documents requested and telephone attendance on Applicant’s Solicitors discussing issues with Notice and possible narrowing thereof, letter (email) to Senior Counsel attaching draft letter in response to Applicant’s Solicitors (PF 20 units) $578.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $578.00 11. Perusing letter (email) from Jonathan Horton QC enclosing settled letter to Applicant 1 s Solicitors in response to Notice of Non-party Disclosure and perusing same (PF 1 unit) $28.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $28.90 -- 7 of 34 -- 8 12. Telephone attendance on Jonathan Horton QC discussing amendments to draft letter in response to Applicant’s Solicitors, letter email to Leah Beumer attaching draft letter settled by Jonathan Horton QC, requesting instructions as to sending same (PF 1 unit) $28.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $28.90 13. Perusing letter (email) from Leah Beumer providing instructions to send letter to Applicant’s Solicitors and letter (email) to Applicant’s Solicitors informing of instructions in response to Notice of Non-party Disclosure, requesting they advise if their client was prepared to narrow the scope of the Notice to take into account our client’s objections (PF 1 unit) $28.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $28.90 14. Telephone attendance on Applicant’s Solicitors when they suggested conference with Counsel and our client to discuss Notice of Non-party Disclosure in attempt to work out categories for disclosure acceptable to both parties (PF 2 units) $57.80 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $57.80 15. Perusing letter (email) from Applicant’s Solicitors referring to telephone conversation 24.11.14 and suggested meeting with Counsel and client to discuss Notice of Non-party Disclosure, suggesting adjournment of hearing on 5 December for week commencing 9.2.15 and letter (email) to Leah Beumer attaching email from Applicant’s Solicitors requesting advice as to meeting with them and Counsel (PF 2 units) $57.80 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allow 50% $28.90 16. Perusing letter (email) from Leah Beumer advising as to attendance at meeting and need to have someone from Department attend and letter (email) to Leah Beumer informing as to advising Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s Allowed -- 8 of 34 -- 9 Applicant’s Solicitors re meeting (PF 1 unit) $28.90 application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 $28.90 17. Telephone attendance on Applicant’s Solicitors suggesting meeting in week of 8 or 15 December; letter (email) to Jonathan Horton QC requesting advice as to his availability in week of 8 or 15 December to attend meeting; letter (email) to Leah Beumer advising as to attending to arrange meeting in week of 8 or 15 December; telephone attendance on Jonathan Horton QC (secretary) advising as to his availability on 15 December; letter (email) to Applicant’s Solicitors advising as to awaiting client’s advice as to availability of meeting, informing as to Jonathan Horton QC only being available in week of 15 December and as to our availability, requesting Consent Orders as to adjournment to February (PF 3 units) $86.70 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allow 66.7% $57.80 18. Perusing letter (email) from Leah Beumer advising as to availability in week of 15 December; perusing letter (email) from Applicant’s Solicitors advising as to confirming dates with their Counsel, setting out terms of suggested email to the Land Court with attached Order; letter (email) to Applicant’s Solicitors approving suggested letter to Land Court, requesting additional wording to draft Order to include 11 costs be reserved 11; perusing letter (email) from Applicant’s Solicitors confirming terms of correspondence to Land Court (PF 2 units) $57.80 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allow 50% $28.90 19. Telephone attendance on Leah Beumer advising as to available dates for meeting and letter (email) to Applicant’s Solicitors informing as to dates on which we were available for meeting with our clients and Counsel (PF 2 units) Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. Allowed -- 9 of 34 -- 10 $57.80 $0.00 $57.80 20. Attending with Jonathan Horton QC, Leah Beumer and DNRM representative at meeting with Applicant’s Solicitors and their Counsel, conferring as to narrowing of scope of Applicant’s request for documents (9.30 -11.10am) (PF 17 units) $491.30 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $491.30 21. Perusing letter (email) from Applicant’ s Solicitors attaching copy Order 4.12.14 regarding adjournment of the Notice of Non-party Disclosure Applications and letter (email) to Leah Beumer attaching copy Order adjourning the matter (PF 1 unit) $28.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 22. Perusing letter (email) from Applicant’s Solicitors referring to meeting 15 .12.14, requesting timeframe as to when our client expected to be in a position to provide List of Documents (PF 1 unit) $28 .90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $28.90 23. Letter (email) to Applicant’s Solicitors advising as to anticipated review of our client’s documents and providing response to them (PF 1 unit) $28.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $28.90 24. Perusing voluminous documents of DNRM contained in two boxes and commencing drafting of List of Documents to be delivered pursuant to Notice of Non-party Disclosure (PF 20 units) $578.00 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $578.00 -- 10 of 34 -- 11 25. Letter (email) to Applicant’s Solicitors advising as to still going through files and of need to obtain instructions once documents had been considered (PF 1 unit) $28.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $28.90 26. Telephone attendance on Leah Beumer advising of the position as to preparation of List of documents and of queries in relation to some documents (PF 1 unit) $28.90 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $28.90 27. Perusing DNRM files EPC 545/2, EPC 545/3, EPC 545/4 and EPC 545 renewal application and drafting (further) List of Documents (PF 15 units) $433.50 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $433.50 28. Attendance to collate voluminous documents of DNRM in order for disclosure (Law Clerk PM 35 units) $619.50 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $619.50 29. Perusing (further) folders of DNRM documents for the purpose of preparation of List of Documents and drafting draft List of Documents (PF 8 units) $231.20 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $231.20 30. Attending to further collate voluminous documents of DNRM for disclosure (PM 35 units) $619.50 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $619.50 31. Paid for 20.3 custom dividers @ $1.10 each $22.33 No objection $22.33 Allowed $22.33 32. Attending to further collate voluminous documents of DNRM for disclosure (PM 35 units) $619.50 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $619.50 33. Paid - copying costs (188 A4 B&W pages @ $1.10 per page) plus 44 A4 colour pages @ $0.80 per page) plus A3 colour pages ® $1.20 per page plus a CD No objection Allowed -- 11 of 34 -- 12 $75.00 $75.00 $75.00 34. Attending to collate voluminous documents of DNRM for disclosure (PM 35 units) $619.50 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $619.50 35. Attending conferring with Jonathan Horton QC on requirements as to disclosure of DNRM (PF 5 units) $144 .50 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $144.50 36. Attending conferring with Jonathan Horton QC on disclosure of documents of DNRM (PF 5 units) $144.50 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $144.50 37. Perusing letter (email) from Jonathan Horton QC advising re privilege over memo and attachment (PF 1 unit) $28.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 38. Telephone attendance on Leah Beumer advising on preparation of List of Documents and as to documents to be excluded (PF 1 unit) $28.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $28.90 39. Paid - Jonathan Horton QC 11.11.14 Conferring with your Ms Freeleagus; inspecting documents (1 hour); reading Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Allowed -- 12 of 34 -- 13 Brief materials (one volume) (1 hour) $495.00 12.11.14 Settling letter (1 hour} $247.50 15.12.14 Attending meeting with Holding Redlich, Mr Chapple of Counsel with your Ms Freeleagus and clients (1 hour) $247.50 18.12.14 Conferring with your Ms Freeleagus as to disclosure (1/2 hour) $123.75 15.2.15 Perusing three volumes of documents to be disclosed (3 hours) $742.50 20.2.15 Conferring with your Ms Freeleagus as to disclosed documents (1/2 hour) $123.75 $1980.00 Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 $0.00 $1,980.00 40. Drafting List of Documents for disclosure having uplifted documents and conferred with Assistant Crown Solicitor (PM 26 units) $460.20 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $460.20 41. Settling List of Documents to be disclosed in final form; conferring with Law Clerk re documents to be included in the List; telephone attendances on Jonathan Horton QC when further queries regarding documents to be included in List (PF 10 units) $289.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $289.00 42. Attending to further collate voluminous documents of DNRM for disclosure (PM Law Clerk 38 units) $672.60 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $672.60 43. Interoffice conference Senior Deputy Crown Solicitor, Assistant Crown Solicitor and Law Clerk re Parliamentary Privilege and public interest immunity in parties’ Submissions (Senior Deputy Crown Solicitor 4 units, $428.00 per hour) $171.20 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 44. Attending to further collate further disclosure documents of DNRM (PM Law Clerk 36 units) $637.20 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $637.20 -- 13 of 34 -- 14 45. Paid - Law In Order copying costs $228.65 No objection $228.65 Allowed $228.65 46. Paid - for one CD $15.00 No objection $15.00 Allowed $15.00 47. Attending on Jonathan Horton QC reviewing documents to be disclosure (PM 5 units) $88.50 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 48. Paid - Jonathan Horton QC 26.2.15 Perusing documents to be disclosed with your Mr Molomby (half hour) $247.50 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 49. Drafting draft letter to Applicant’s Solicitors referring to "without prejudice" meeting 15.12.14, enclosing documents our client produced, together with List, informing of objections remaining as stated in our letter 17.11.14 and letter (email) to Leah Beumer enclosing draft letter, requesting instructions (PF 1 unit) $28.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $28.90 50. Perusing letter (email) from Leah Beumer providing instructions to send letter and letter to Applicant’s Solicitors enclosing documents and List (PF 1 unit) (courier fee paid) $15.40; $28.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $44.30 51. Telephone attendance on Applicant’s Solicitors requesting advice as to documents from Hansard 2007- 2008, advising them in regard to privilege (PF 2 units) Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s Not allowed -- 14 of 34 -- 15 $57.80 application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 $0.00 52. Telephone attendance on Leah Beumer re Ministerial documents, providing recommendations for amendment to letter (PF 2 units) $57.80 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $57.80 53. Perusing legal files of DNRM to extract further documents and discussing request for further documents with Jonathan Horton QC (PF 1 unit) $28.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $28.90 54. Attending to further collate voluminous disclosure documents of DNRM in light of further request (PM 10 units) $177.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $177.00 55. Telephone attendance on Jonathan Horton QC discussing legal Parliamentary Privilege, receiving his advices (PF 1 unit) $28.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 56. Perusing documents referred to in part 2 of List of Documents; drafting draft letter to Applicant’ s Solicitors referring to telephone conversation2.3.15, advising Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s Not allowed -- 15 of 34 -- 16 as to claims made in relation to documents in part 2 of List provided; letter (email) to Leah Beumer enclosing draft letter, requesting instructions thereof (PF 4 units) $115.60 application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 $0.00 57. Perusing letter (email) from Leah Beumer providing instructions on response to Applicant’s Solicitors and letter (email) to Applicant ‘s Solicitors referring to telephone conversation 2.3.15, advising as to claims made for privilege in relation to documents in part 2 of List (PF 1 unit) $28.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 58. Perusing letter (email) from Applicant’s Solicitors setting out their client’s response to the documents that had already been provided and their client’s concerns about our future disclosure, requesting further disclosure and that our client re-consider its grounds of objection (PF 1 unit) $28.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 59. Telephone attendance on Jonathan Horton QC conferring on correspondence from Applicant’s Solicitors and their request for further disclosure and letter (email) to DNRM (Margot Clarkson) requesting instructions as to DG’s office keeping a record of any briefing notes (PF 2 Units)(charge rate now $299.00 per hour) $59.80 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 60. Examining documents in volumes of files EPCl, EPC2 and EPC3 comparing those with documents requested in letter from Applicant’s Solicitors (PF 29 units) $867.10 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $867.10 61. Perusing letter (email) from Margot Clarkson (DNRM) advising as to having spoken to Director-General’s office and as to them not holding briefing notes, especially not as far back as 2007-2008 (PF 1 unit) Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and Allowed -- 16 of 34 -- 17 $29.90 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 $29.90 62. Reading letter (email) from Margot Clarkson referring to earlier email today, providing advices on types of documents requested in letter from Applicant’s Solicitors (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $29.90 63. Telephone attendance on Jonathan Horton QC conferring on Applicant’s Solicitors request and possible adjournment on 30.10.15, receiving his advices and telephone attendance on Applicant’s Solicitors advising as to still checking position as to documents and as to reverting to them next week (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 64. Telephone attendance on Margot Clarkson (DNMR) conferring at length as to searches undertaken for documents and as to possible adjournment (PF 4 units) $119.60 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allow 50% $59.80 65. Perusing letter (email) from Margot Clarkson referring to status of disclosure, providing instructions on legal files and other departmental files; letter (email) to Margot Clarkson advising as to reverting to her; perusing further letter (email) from Margot Clarkson advising as to searches which may be available and as to copies of documents from 1992 to 1996 being stored in off-site archives; and letter (email) to Margot Clarkson informing of discussions with Jonathan Horton QC and of his advices as to categories of documents we were not obliged to search for (PF 2 units) $59.80 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $59.80 -- 17 of 34 -- 18 66. Perusing letter (email) from Margot Clarkson providing instructions as to objection to various categories of documents and as to swearing of an Affidavit and letter (email) to Margot Clarkson advising as to Affidavit having to be by the DG as custodian of the documents (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 67. Telephone attendance on Margot Clarkson discussing searches for documents at length, advising on disclosure (PF 3 units) $89.70 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allow 50% $44.85 68. Perusing letter (email) from Margot Clarkson requesting advice as to reference to without prejudice material in Affidavit (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 69. Perusing documents to be disclosed to Applicant’s Solicitors, including redaction of documents and conferring with Assistant Crown Solicitor in regard thereto (PM Lawyer now rate $211.00 per hour, 22 units) $464.20 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 70. Letter (email) to Margot Clarkson (DNRM) advising as to inclusion of without prejudice material in Affidavit (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 -- 18 of 34 -- 19 71. Perusing letter (email) from Jonathan Horton QC attaching draft Order following hearing on 30.10.15; perusing draft Order; telephone attendance on Jonathan Horton QC discussing terms of Order and position re Applicant’s Counsel (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 72. Telephone attendance on Margot Clarkson (DNRM) discussing proposed response to Applicant’s Solicitors at length (PF 6 units) $179.40 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 73. Telephone attendance on Jonathan Horton QC discussing our client 1 s proposal as to resolving the issue of disclosure (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 74. Drafting draft letter to Applicant’s Solicitors as to our client’s proposal to resolve the issue of disclosure and letter (email) to Jonathan Horton QC attaching client’s instructions and proposed draft letter to Applicant’s Solicitors, requesting he settle response and make any comments (PF 5 units) $149.50 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 75. Perusing Commercial in conference material and attending to redacting of same for Counsel (PM 3 units) $63.30 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 76. Paid - Jonathan Horton QC 8.11.15 Settling letter (1 hour) Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and Not allowed -- 19 of 34 -- 20 $500.00 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 $0.00 77. Perusing and further redacting documents to be disclosed (PM 4 units) $84.40 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 78. Perusing letter (email) from Margot Clarkson re settled letter from Jonathan Horton QC; further searching file for memorandum; drafting further amendments to letter to Applicant’s Solicitors to include further documents; letter (email) to Jonathan Horton QC attaching amended letter and additional documents intended to be included, requesting he advise thereon (PF 5 units) $149.50 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 79. Perusing letter (email) from Jonathan Horton QC enclosing further amended letter to Applicant’s Solicitors; settling letter to Applicant’s Solicitors in final form and attached proposed further disclosure; letter (email) to Margot Clarkson enclosing proposed letter and attachments proposed to be sent to Applicant’s Solicitors; requesting instructions thereon; perusing letter (email) from Margot Clarkson advising as to further searches undertaken; letter (email) to Applicant’s Solicitors referring to General Application regarding our client’s objection to the Notice of Non-party Disclosure, advising of instructions in response in the interests of attempting to resolve the issues (PF 2 units) $59.80 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 80. Paid - Jonathan Horton QC 9.11.15 Brief telephone conference with your Ms Freeleagus (half hour) $250.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 -- 20 of 34 -- 21 81. Perusing letter (email) from Margot Clarkson requesting advice as to response from Applicant’s Solicitors and letter (email) to her advising as to there being no response as yet (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 82. Letter (email) to Applicant’s Solicitors requesting advice as to their client’s instructions re letter 10.11.15 (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 83. Perusing letter (email) from DNRM (Moira Tucker) providing instructions to send letter to Applicant’s Solicitors if response to our letter 10.11.15 not received today and letter (email) acknowledging those instructions (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 84. Perusing letter (email) from Moira Tucker requesting confirmation as to letter being sent to Applicant’s Solicitors on 21.12.15; letter (email) to Moira Tucker advising as to letter not having been sent and as to proposed telephone call to Applicant’s Solicitors; telephone attendance on Applicant’s Solicitors when advised as to Partner being on leave; letter (email) to Moira Tucker advising as to letter being sent to Applicant’s Solicitors; letter (email) to Applicant’s Solicitors referring to Order 17.12.15 and our letter 10.11.15 with our client’s proposal, requesting urgent response; letter (email) to Moira Tucker attaching letter sent to Applicant’s Solicitors (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 85. Telephone attendance on Applicant’s Solicitors (Alexandra Ottens) when Basis of objection – Not allowed -- 21 of 34 -- 22 advised as to being unable to respond until after 11.1.16; telephone attendance on Moira Tucker advising as to Applicant’s Solicitors obtaining of instructions; perusing letter (email) from Applicant 1 s Solicitors advising as to not yet having received instructions in respect of proposals set out in our letter 10.11.13 and as to not being in a position to respond until after 11.1.16; letter (email) to Applicant’s Solicitors advising documents would be served in accordance with Court Order; drafting letter to Applicant’s Solicitors enclosing documents by way of service; perusing letter from Moira Tucker requesting confirmation as to service of documents; letter (email) to Moira Tucker advising as to preparing letter, enclosing documents and as to posting of same (PF 4 units) $119.60 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 $0.00 86. Drafting letter to Solicitors for Respondent regarding BHP Commercial in confidence material, informing as to Orders made on 17.12.15, enclosing documents pursuant thereto; attending conferring with Assistant Crown Solicitor re letter and documents to be provided to Respondent’s Solicitors; letter (email) to Respondents ‘ Solicitors attaching letter regarding BHP Commercial in confidence material; letter (email) to Moira Tucker attaching letter sent to Solicitors for Respondent (PM 11 units)(now rate $221.00 per hour) $243.10 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 87. Perusing letter (email) from Applicant’s Solicitors (19.1.16) responding to our letter 10.11.15; letter (email) to Jonathan Horton QC enclosing letter from Applicant’s Solicitors, requesting he discuss same; letter (email) to Margot Clarkson (DNRM) attaching letter from Applicant’s Solicitors, requesting comments thereon (PF 3 units) $89.70 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 88. Perusing letter (email) from Margot Clarkson providing observations on letter from Applicant’s Solicitors and letter (email) to her advising as to Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s Not allowed -- 22 of 34 -- 23 discussing response with Senior Counsel (PF 1 unit) $29.90 application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 $0.00 89. Telephone attendance on Jonathan Horton QC discussing letter from Applicant’s Solicitors and proposed reply thereto, receiving his advices (PF 2 units) $59.80 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 90. Perusing documents re delegations contained in four folders and concerning EPC 545 manual contained in one folder; perusing all files of DNRM to double check for missing documents; drafting response to letter from Applicant’s Solicitors of 19.1.16; letter (email) to Jonathan Horton QC attaching proposed response to Applicant ‘s letter (PF 30 units) $897.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed in part $200.00 91. Telephone attendance on Margot Clarkson conferring as to location of any further documents, discussing progressing of matter generally; reading letter (email) from Senior Counsel attaching settled letter; letter (email) to Margot Clarkson enclosing settled letter from Counsel, requesting instructions as to sending same; perusing letter (email) from Margot Clarkson approving sending of letter; letter (email) to Respondents Solicitors enclosing letter and enclosures (PF 4 units) $119.60 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allow 25% $29.90 92. Telephone attendance on Jonathan Horton QC conferring on draft responses, receiving advice thereon and as to matter generally; perusing letter (email) from Jonathan Horton QC enclosing settled letter (PF 2 units) Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. Not allowed -- 23 of 34 -- 24 $59.80 $0.00 $0.00 93. Paid - for document production (1659 x A4 B & W pages @ $0.10 per page plus 77 x A4 colour pages @ $0.85 per page plus 46 x A3 pages @ $1.25 per page and resources) $472.40 No objection $472.40 Allowed $472.40 94. Perusing complete files of DNRM to extract documents in response to Notice of Non-party Disclosure (PM 60 units) $1326.00 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $1,326.00 95. Perusing letter (email) from Jonathan Horton QC in response to correspondence from Applicant’s Solicitors 19.1.16; perusing further email from Senior Counsel enclosing revised settled letter; drafting amendment to letter to include further sentence; and letter (email) to Margot Clarkson (DNRM) attaching draft letter settled by Senior Counsel, requesting urgent advices thereon (PF 2 units) $59.80 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 96. Paid - Jonathan Horton QC 27.1.16, 29.1.16 and 1.2.16 Settling correspondence ( 3 items )(3 hours) $1500.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 97. Perusing (further) files of documents of DNRM to extract documents in response to Notice of Non-party Disclosure (PM 35 units) $773.50 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $773.50 98. Perusing letter (email) from Applicant’s Solicitors submitting documents located by our client had not been separately identified in any List of Documents and instead had been referred to generally as being contained in "legal files" and further as to documents that ought to be produced as our client had not demonstrated they were properly the subject of an objection to production on the basis that they were privileged (PF 1 unit) Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. Allowed -- 24 of 34 -- 25 $29.90 $0.00 $29.90 99. Interoffice conference Lawyer with Assistant Crown Solicitor conferring as to preparation of supplementary List of Documents and consideration of additional material (PM 3 units) $66.30 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $66.30 100. Perusing letter (email) from Applicant’s Solicitors noting receipt of bundle of further documents from the EPC 545 tenure files which did not include a supplementary List of Documents, requesting confirmation as to providing them with a supplementary List of Documents and allocated number identification and letter (email) to Applicant’s Solicitors advising as to preparing a supplementary List of Documents to include all the new documents given to them and as to sending copy of 1.182 (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $29.90 101. Perusing letter (email) from Jonathan Horton QC attaching draft index of documents in relation to which legal professional privilege and public interest immunity was claimed, with notations thereon as to disclosure (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 102. Paid - Jonathan Horton QC 5.2 .16 Further reading of documents (2 hours) $1000.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 103. Paid - Jonathan Horton QC 8.2.16 Further reading of documents and preparation of matter for hearing (3 hours) Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s Not allowed -- 25 of 34 -- 26 $1500.00 application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 $0.00 104. Paid - Jonathan Horton QC 9.2.16 Further preparation (perusal of documents and legal files) (2 hours) $1000.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 105. Paid - Jonathan Horton QC 10.2.16 Settling index to file LEG/315 and perusing subject documentation for privilege (2 hours) $1000.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 106. Drafting supplementary List of Documents having further perused documents of DNRM (PM 20 units) $442.00 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $442.00 107. Perusing letter (email) from Margot Clarkson requesting copies of certain Cherwell Creek documents to enable further searches to be undertaken, advising as to redaction of copy documents ; letter (email) to Margot Clarkson attaching copies of documents which were redacted before being provided to Crown Law, providing numbers of documents in List of Documents; telephone attendance on Jonathan Horton QC conferring and receiving his advices on public interest immunity; perusing letter (email) from Jonathan Horton QC advising on public interest immunity (PM 3 units) $66.30 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 108. Perusing letter (email) from Margot Clarkson advising as to searches undertaken (DocTrak searches, eBOCs Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Allowed -- 26 of 34 -- 27 searches and documents 2.5 and 2.6) and as to results (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 $29.90 109. Lawyer attending conferring with Assistant Crown Solicitors relative to additional missing documents referred to by Applicant’s Counsel; perusing files of DNRM and Crown Law searching for missing documents; perusing and considering further documents provided by Margot Clarkson (DNRM) (PM 30 units) $663.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $663.00 110. Perusing documents of DNRM and internal documents for missing documents referred to by Applicant ‘s Counsel; perusing (further) DNRM and Crown Law files for missing documents; perusing and considering further documents provided by Margot Clarkson (PM 20 units) $442.00 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $442.00 111. Perusing documents contained in three boxes of files to locate letter 30.10.07 and drafting draft Affidavit of Paula Freeleagus regarding costs (PF 17 units) $508.30 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed in part $299.00 112. Attending to collate documentation for disclosure; further perusal of DNRM and Crown Law files to extract relevant documents, including electronic documents for response to Notice of Non-party Disclosure (PM 56 units) $1237.60 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $1,237.60 113. Attending to redaction of documents pursuant to directions of Member Smith having perused transcript; perusing documents to be provided from LEG00315 folder and drafting draft supplementary List of Documents Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents Allowed -- 27 of 34 -- 28 having identified relevant documents (PM 10 units) $221.00 $0.00 $221.00 114. Drafting (initial) amended exhibit index; perusing and comparing documents in amended exhibit index with original; conferring with Assistant Crown Solicitor regarding documents in amended exhibit index (PM 20 units) $442.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 115. Assistant Crown Solicitor conferring with Lawyer re amended exhibit index and documents referred to therein (PF 3 units) $89.70 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 116. Drafting amended supplementary List of Documents of DNRM; collating documents for disclosure and drafting redaction of documents (PM 45 units) $994.50 Basis of objection - the external legal cost is not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents $0.00 Allowed $994.50 117. Settling (further) supplementary List of Documents for production to Applicant’s Solicitors; settling redaction of documents attending conferring with Jonathan Horton QC and Assistant Crown Solicitor re documents to be provided to Applicant’s Solicitors; perusing documents of DNRM for further documents requested by Counsel (PM 50 units) $1105.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allow 50% $552.50 118. Assisting Crown Solicitor attending conferring with Jonathan Horton QC finalising List of Documents and documents to be included therein (PF 7 units) $209.30 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 -- 28 of 34 -- 29 119. Letter (email) to Margot Clarkson attaching documentation to be sent to Applicant’s Solicitors for approval; perusing letter (email) from Margot Clarkson providing instructions as to forwarding document, requesting clarification about document no. 1.162; telephone attendance on Margot Clarkson advising on redaction of copy document 1.162; letter email to Applicant’s Solicitors referring to Orders made by Member Smith on 9.2.16, enclosing revised redacted documents, supplementary List of Non-party documents, advising thereon; letter (email) to Jonathan Horton QC attaching copy letter and attachment sent to Applicant’s Solicitors (PF 4 units) $119.60 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allow 50% $59.80 120. Paid - 3.2.16 photocopying costs (727 x A4 B&W pages @ $0.10 pp plus resources) $77.70 No objection $77.70 Allowed $77.70 121. Paid - 26.2.16 copying costs (504 x A4 B&W pages @ $0.10 pp plus 6 x A4 colour pages @ $0.85 pp plus resources) $142.50 No objection $142.50 Allowed $142.50 122. Paid - Jonathan Horton QC Short telephone conference with your Ms Freeleagus; short telephone conference with your Mr Dwyer, Ms Freeleagus and Ms Mackenzie (1 hour) $500.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 123. Perusing letter (email) from Applicant’s Solicitors requesting advice as to our client having any objection to extension of time for any notification under Order 4 to 1.3.16 and letter (email) to Margot Clarkson requesting urgent instructions thereon (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 -- 29 of 34 -- 30 124. Perusing letter (email) from Margot Clarkson providing instructions to agree to proposed extension and letter (email) to Applicant’s Solicitors advising as to having no objection to the extension of time (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 125. Perusing copy letter Applicant’s Solicitors to Registrar challenging the claim for privilege in documents listed in supplementary List of Documents; letter (email) to Counsel attaching letter from Applicant’s Solicitors setting out their objections; telephone attendance on Jonathan Horton QC conferring on objection to various documents raised by Applicant’s Solicitors; letter (email) to Margot Clarkson attaching letter from Applicant’s Solicitors, informing as to having looked at documents in question, advising thereon; perusing letter (email) from Applicant’s Solicitors referring to supplementary List of Documents served 26.2.16, requesting copies of documents; telephone attendance on Jonathan Horton QC conferring on emails from Applicant’s Solicitors and documents requested, receiving his advices; interoffice conference with Lawyer as to documents sought by Applicant’s Solicitors; examining documents provided by way of disclosure and comparing same against documents requested by Applicant’s Solicitors and document 1.51; letter (email) to Jonathan Horton QC informing as to having considered documents referred to in second email from Applicant’s Solicitors advising on documents disclosed (PF 30 units) $897.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 126. Perusing files containing documents disclosed by DNRM in light of Applicant’s Solicitors request for production of original documents for inspection; perusing (further) and preparing documents for production; conferring with Assistant Crown Solicitor in relation to emails from Applicant’s Solicitors requesting Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. Allowed -- 30 of 34 -- 31 documents and as to response; telephone attendance on Assistant Crown Solicitor and Jonathan Horton QC conferring on emails from Applicant ‘s Solicitors regarding documents sought referred to in Affidavit of Margot Clarkson and supplementary List of Non-party Documents (PM 30 units) $663.00 $0.00 $663.00 127. Telephone attendance on Jonathan Horton QC conferring on disclosed documents requested by Applicant’s Solicitors, receiving his advices; perusing letter (email) from Senior Counsel providing recommendation on production of documents requested; telephone attendance on Margot Clarkson (DNRM) conferring generally on further disclosure of documents and recommendations of Senior Counsel; examining legal file to ensure consistent numbering of documents in exhibit index and supplementary List of Documents; attending to locate additional documents to be disclosed; drafting draft letter to Applicant’s Solicitors in response to their letter seeking further disclosure; letter (email) to Senior Counsel attaching draft letter for settling; perusing letter (email) from Senior Counsel attaching settled letter to Applicant’s Solicitors; perusing letter (email) from Senior Counsel attaching settled letter; drafting further supplementary List of Documents having located additional documents and numbering same to conform with supplementary List (PF 38 units) $1136.20 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $1,136.20 128. Attending with Margot Clarkson (DNRM) and Lawyer conferring with Jonathan Horton QC discussing response to letter from Applicant’s Solicitors question of claim of privilege Assistant Crown Solicitor (PF 10 units) $299.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 129. Lawyer attending conferring with Senior Counsel in like regard (PM 10 units) Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s Not allowed -- 31 of 34 -- 32 $221.00 application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 $0.00 130. Attending perusing cases regarding award of costs for Non-party Disclosure; collating documents for inclusion in further supplementary List of Documents (PM 20 units) $442.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 131. Perusing letter (email) from Jonathan Horton QC attaching further revised letter to Applicant’s Solicitors; telephone attendance on Counsel conferring on revised letter to Applicant’s Solicitors; drafting further supplementary List of Documents identifying documents previously provided but not numbered; letter (email) to Margot Clarkson attaching revised draft letter and revised further supplementary List of Documents, requesting confirmation of instructions to send same; perusing letter (email) from Margot Clarkson providing instructions to send letter and documents to Applicant’s Solicitors; drafting further supplementary List of Documents in final form; letter (email) to Applicant’s Solicitors referring to their emails 1.3.16, advising on documents declined to be produced, enclosing copy documents inadvertently omitted from the previous bundle and further supplementary List of Documents (PF 9 units) $269.10 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $269.10 132. Paid - Jonathan Horton QC 1.3.16 Short consultation with Ms Nicholas of Counsel as to approach generally and numerous telephone conferences with your Ms Freeleagus (2 hours) $1000.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 -- 32 of 34 -- 33 133. Paid - Jonathan Horton QC 2.3.16 Conferring with your Ms Freeleagus and Mr Molomby with Ms Mackenzie and Ms Clarkson with Ms Nicholas of Counsel; settling correspondence (1 hour) $500.00 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 134. Paid - document production 12 sets 10 tab dividers plus 0.8 sets 5 tab dividers $14.88 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Allowed $14.88 135. Paid - courier fee on uplifting Brief from Jonathan Horton QC $12.76 Basis of objection – 1. Attendance relates to the Departments objection to the Notice of Non-Party Disclosure and Cherwell Creek’s application filed 10 October 2014, not costs of production; and 2. Further and alternatively the external legal cost was not reasonable for the purpose of production of documents. $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 136. Drafting Costs Statement for Assessment (PF 67 units) $2003.30 Not claimed - see paragraph [20] of the Department’s Submissions $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 137. Copy to serve (31 pages) $7.75 Not claimed - see paragraph [20] of the Department’s Submissions $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 138. Photocopying accounts and receipts for filing (7 pages x 3) $5.25 Not claimed - see paragraph [20] of the Department’s Submissions $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 139. Attending Land Court Registry to file Bill of Costs (PF 3 units) $89.70 Not claimed - see paragraph [20] of the Department’s Submissions $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 140. Letter to Applicant’s Solicitors enclosing copy Bill of Costs by way of service (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Not claimed - see paragraph [20] of the Department’s Submissions $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 -- 33 of 34 -- 34 141. Perusing letter from Applicant’s Solicitors enclosing response (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Not claimed - see paragraph [20] of the Department’s Submissions $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 142. Perusing Applicant’s response (PF 30 units) $897.00 Not claimed - see paragraph [20] of the Department’s Submissions $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 143. Perusing letter from Land Court Registry advising as to assessment of costs (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Not claimed - see paragraph [20] of the Department’s Submissions $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 144. Perusing Order as to assessment of costs (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Not claimed - see paragraph [20] of the Department’s Submissions $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 145. Letter to Applicant’s Solicitors enclosing copy Order made, making request for payment of assessed costs (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Not claimed - see paragraph [20] of the Department’s Submissions $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 146. Perusing letter from Applicant’s Solicitors enclosing cheque in payment (PF 1 unit) $29.90 Not claimed - see paragraph [20] of the Department’s Submissions $0.00 Not allowed $0.00 [19] On my calculations, the total amount allowed for the items claimed is the sum of $23,198.41 and I accordingly determine that such sum represents the reasonable costs of production payable by the applicant to DNRM. Order The applicant pay the Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Mines its costs and expenses of production of the documents provided to the applicant assessed in the sum of $23,198.41. PA SMITH MEMBER OF THE LAND COURT -- 34 of 34 --