STEP 1
Get the numbers
Gather your agreement, invoices, costs estimates, any updated disclosures and proof of payment. Request a statement of account and, where available under the law, an itemised bill.
Review my agreement →Western Australia · Legal costs · Start here
Question your legal bill. Know your rights.
CourtRecord helps you examine your legal agreement, identify what the statute says, organise payments and calculate a possible excess—independently of law firms and regulators. A Supreme Court case is not the automatic first step.
First: check whether the agreement itself is void
Division 4 — s 185(1): an agreement actually made in contravention of ss 179–183 is void. The statute does not expressly require a costs assessor before the Court can decide voidness. You still need proof of the specific contravention and of any refundable excess.
Alternative, Division 3 — ss 174 and 178: failure to make the required disclosures has its own voidness consequences and recovery restrictions. Deciding voidness and quantifying a refund are different tasks.
Compare the two statutory routes →Make a complaint with numbered questions and track the response →
STEP 2
Ask the firm in writing
Identify what you dispute, the amount claimed, and the documents or refund you want. Keep the firm's response. You can request repayment without first obtaining a judgment.
Simple request wording →STEP 3
Choose your route—not theirs
Check whether you can secure voluntary repayment under the statute. Formal costs-dispute processes are separate options with different rules, deadlines and limits. The Board is not the only route.
Read what the law says →STEP 4
Use formal recovery only if needed
Costs assessment, a repayment claim or an enforceable court order may be needed if the amount remains contested or unpaid. These are different procedures, not one compulsory sequence for everyone.
Assessment explained →Which route might fit my bill?
Enter what you know. This is a quick screen—not a ruling on jurisdiction, time limits or entitlement. WA only.
Start by checking the date you first instructed the law firm. Then check the Board's time and monetary limits before you choose where to apply.
Amounts currently published on the Board website (check the applicable financial year): $314,330 total fees and $31,440 disputed portion. The threshold for a Board binding costs determination is distinct from eligibility for attempted resolution. Financial thresholds do not override deadlines or other statutory conditions. Verify current indexed limits ↗
Do not miss these time limits
Legal Practice Board: generally 60 days after a lump-sum bill, or 30 days after receiving a requested itemised bill. The Board may extend certain deadlines by up to four months if justified. Supreme Court costs assessment: generally within 12 months under s 198; there may be an extension mechanism. Check the dates for your matter promptly.
These are summaries of the Board's current guidance and the Supreme Court's factsheet, not a personalised calculation. Board time limits ↗ · Supreme Court costs factsheet (PDF) ↗
What does the law actually say?
Agreement made contrary to Division 4 — s 185(1)
If a costs agreement contravenes, or is entered into in contravention of, a provision of Division 4 (ss 179–183), it is void. Prove the actual infringement; for example, an evidenced denial of the right to require a negotiated agreement under s 179, a term purporting to bar assessment under s 180(4), or an impermissible contingency fee under s 183. Section 185(1) does not expressly require assessment before a court may decide voidness. Repayment requires establishing what excess, if any, is due.
My agreement may be void — s 178(1)(a)
A contravention of applicable legal-costs disclosure obligations makes the associated costs agreement void, subject to relevant Uniform Rules, including rule 72A. Voidness does not automatically mean all work was free or all money is refundable. Section 178 also restricts recovery of costs pending assessment or permitted dispute determination.
The law practice must repay an excess — s 185(2)
Where s 185 applies, the practice cannot recover more than it would have been entitled to recover had the agreement not been void and must repay excess received. The legally recoverable amount needs to be established; simply comparing total paid with an estimate does not prove the final refund.
An unpaid statutory refund can be pursued as a debt — s 185(5)
The person entitled to repayment can recover an unpaid amount required by s 185(2), (3) or (4) as a debt in a court with jurisdiction. This is a recovery right, not an automatic payment order just because a costs agreement is disputed.
What can the Legal Practice Board decide?
Under ss 291–293, the Board can attempt to resolve eligible costs disputes. In qualifying smaller unresolved disputes it may make a binding determination; the Board website currently identifies $31,440 as the relevant indexed threshold. Larger unresolved disputes may need assessment or another applicable procedure. Section 197 limits concurrent/serial processes, so read the Board's advice before filing both.
Read the actual provisions: s 178 · s 185 · s 197 · s 291. The applicable law depends on when first instructions were given.
A simple first letter
Use this to start the process; edit it to match your evidence. It is a request, not a court form.
Verify the law and the institutions
Who's on the Legal Practice Board? Follow the parliamentary inquiry →
Legal Practice Board — costs disputes and limits ↗
Legal Practice Board — complaint form ↗
Legal Practice Board — what lawyers must disclose ↗