The court found that the taxing officer failed to distinguish between the basis for taxation in ordinary litigation and arbitration matters, did not apply the relevant Remuneration Charges of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, and neglected to consider the complexity, importance, and professional standing involved. In the absence of any opposition or controverting evidence from the Respondents, the court was satisfied that the Applicants had established a proper case for challenging the taxation. Consequently, the court set aside the decision of the taxing officer as it related to the disputed items in the Bill of Costs and ordered that the Bill be re-taxed before a different taxing master.