David & Anor v Abdishou & Ors [2007] NSWSC 890

David & Anor v Abdishou & Ors [2007] NSWSC 890

The plaintiffs were liable for the costs thrown away by the adjournment and amendment, including the specified hearing days, because the adjournment and proposed recasting of imputations wasted costs. However, indemnity costs were not justified because the plaintiffs' conduct did not amount to the relevant delinquency required for such an order. A stay was not appropriate on the assumption that the plaintiffs would maintain and diligently pursue the amended case. Costs were ordered payable forthwith because of the financial impact on the defendants and the likely significant delay before finality. The defendants were not awarded all costs of the proceedings to date because some proposed...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 August 2007
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings / Costs After Adjournment of S7 a Trial and Proposed Further Amended Statement of Claim
Outcome
Plaintiffs ordered to pay costs thrown away by the adjournment and amendment, payable forthwith; leave granted to file a further amended statement of claim; indemnity costs, interest on costs, and stay refused.
Legal Topics
['adjournment' 'late Amendment' 'costs Thrown Away' 'indemnity Costs' 'costs Payable Forthwith' 'stay of Proceedings']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['adjournment' 'late Amendment' 'costs Thrown Away' 'indemnity Costs' 'costs Payable Forthwith' 'stay of Proceedings']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Defamation Proceedings / Costs After Adjournment of S7 a Trial and Proposed Further Amended Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiffs should pay the defendants' costs of the proceedings to date because of the adjournment and proposed late amendment." 'Whether any costs should be ordered on an indemnity basis.' 'Whether costs should be payable forthwith.' 'Whether the proceedings should be stayed until the costs are paid.' 'Whether the seventh defendant should receive interest on costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs were liable for the costs thrown away by the adjournment and amendment, including the specified hearing days, because the adjournment and proposed recasting of imputations wasted costs. However, indemnity costs were not justified because the plaintiffs' conduct did not amount to the relevant delinquency required for such an order. A stay was not appropriate on the assumption that the plaintiffs would maintain and diligently pursue the amended case. Costs were ordered payable forthwith because of the financial impact on the defendants and the likely significant delay before finality. The defendants were not awarded all costs of the proceedings to date because some proposed...

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs ordered to pay costs thrown away by the adjournment and amendment, payable forthwith; leave granted to file a further amended statement of claim; indemnity costs, interest on costs, and stay refused.

Orders

  • ['The plaintiffs are to pay the costs thrown away by the adjournment, being the costs of 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 and 30 July 2007 and 2 August 2007.' 'The plaintiffs have leave to file a further amended statement of claim within 14 days, and are to pay the costs thrown away by the amendment.' 'The costs, as assessed or...