Robust Builders Pty Ltd v Barai & Anor [2023] NSWDC 371

Robust Builders Pty Ltd v Barai & Anor [2023] NSWDC 371

Because the proceeding had already been protracted and previously vacated, the parties were ready to proceed, Mr Mehndiratta had effectively been representing the builder without objection, and his failure to state awareness of possible personal costs liability was not a precondition to any future application for non-party costs under s 98, the appropriate course was to dispense under s 14 with the requirement in UCPR r 7.2(2)(a)(iv) and permit him to carry on the proceeding for the builder rather than adjourn the hearing.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 August 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Proceeding Concerning Unpaid Building Invoices and a Cross Claim for Allegedly Incomplete and Defective Works / Application by Director of Plaintiff to Carry on the Proceeding at the Commencement of the Hearing
Outcome
The Court permitted Mr Mehndiratta to carry on the proceeding for the builder and waived compliance with UCPR r 7.2(2)(a)(iv).
Legal Topics
['company Representation by Director' 'adjournment' 'costs Against Non Party' 'dispensation With Procedural Requirement' 'case Management']
['civil Procedure' 'building and Construction'] ['company Representation by Director' 'adjournment' 'costs Against Non Party' 'dispensation With Procedural Requirement' 'case Management']

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

Civil Proceeding Concerning Unpaid Building Invoices and a Cross Claim for Allegedly Incomplete and Defective Works / Application by Director of Plaintiff to Carry on the Proceeding at the Commencement of the Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the director of the plaintiff company should be permitted to carry on the proceeding despite not making the statement required by UCPR r 7.2(2)(a)(iv).' 'Whether the requirement that the director acknowledge awareness that he may be liable to pay some or all of the costs of the proceedings should be dispensed with.' 'Whether the hearing should be adjourned to allow the director time to seek legal representation.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the proceeding had already been protracted and previously vacated, the parties were ready to proceed, Mr Mehndiratta had effectively been representing the builder without objection, and his failure to state awareness of possible personal costs liability was not a precondition to any future application for non-party costs under s 98, the appropriate course was to dispense under s 14 with the requirement in UCPR r 7.2(2)(a)(iv) and permit him to carry on the proceeding for the builder rather than adjourn the hearing.

Court Disposition

The Court permitted Mr Mehndiratta to carry on the proceeding for the builder and waived compliance with UCPR r 7.2(2)(a)(iv).

Orders

  • ['Mr Mehndiratta is permitted to carry on the proceeding for the builder.' 'Compliance with the requirement that Mr Mehndiratta make the statement in UCPR r 7.2(2)(a)(iv) is waived.']