Hello all, I have a general question that has been bugging me about something I read in the terms of engagement of a lawyer here in Western Australia. This relates to a condition in the terms relating to disputes regarding fees etc and that any action needs to be taken in the high court of Australia if the client wanted to recover costs or whatever. Is it just me, or are the lawyers trying to gain some advantage over their clients by including such a clause, whereby it would be very impracticable, and highly unlikely for anyone to proceed with such an action? In a broad sense, the lawyer fees are protected by a clause that is included to protect any fees that they charge, regardless of amount or perceived value. In this case, the fees were only about $400, and there was no dispute about the costs. I would think that a fair and reasonable thing to do in the event of any dispute regarding fees, would be done in a court or jurisdiction relating to the value of the claim. In this case, the Small Claims Tribunal. Why would the lawyers include this clause in their terms?