Gough & Gilmour Holdings Pty Ltd v Peter Campbell Earthmoving Pty Ltd (No 2) [2009] NSWCA 133

Gough & Gilmour Holdings Pty Ltd v Peter Campbell Earthmoving Pty Ltd (No 2) [2009] NSWCA 133

The parties agreed on the substantive orders required to give effect to the earlier Judgment, subject to minor corrections for completeness. The Court held that the primary Judge should determine all costs questions relating to proceedings before him, including costs of the further hearing, rather than the Court of Appeal making an order dealing with one aspect of those costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 June 2009
Procedural Posture
Consequential Orders / Court of Appeal Determination of Form of Orders and Costs After Judgment Delivered on 11 March 2009
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; cross appeal allowed in part; judgment set aside; matter referred back to the Primary Judge; parties to bear their own costs of the appeal; costs before the Primary Judge reserved.
Legal Topics
['consequential Orders' 'appeal and Cross Appeal' 'remitter to Primary Judge' 'costs of Appeal' 'minimum Hours Warranty']
['civil Procedure' 'costs' 'contracts'] ['consequential Orders' 'appeal and Cross Appeal' 'remitter to Primary Judge' 'costs of Appeal' 'minimum Hours Warranty']

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

Consequential Orders / Court of Appeal Determination of Form of Orders and Costs After Judgment Delivered on 11 March 2009

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What orders should be made to give effect to the Judgment delivered on 11 March 2009.' 'Whether G&G should bear costs of any further hearing insofar as it was required to determine issues arising from paragraph 15(b) of its defence to cross-claim, or whether costs should be reserved to the primary Judge.']

Ratio Decidendi

The parties agreed on the substantive orders required to give effect to the earlier Judgment, subject to minor corrections for completeness. The Court held that the primary Judge should determine all costs questions relating to proceedings before him, including costs of the further hearing, rather than the Court of Appeal making an order dealing with one aspect of those costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; cross appeal allowed in part; judgment set aside; matter referred back to the Primary Judge; parties to bear their own costs of the appeal; costs before the Primary Judge reserved.

Orders

  • ['Appeal allowed in part.' 'Cross appeal allowed in part.' 'The judgment entered on 3 September 2008 in favour of the respondent by James J in the sum of $2,129,881.65, inclusive of interest, be set aside.' 'The matter be referred back to the Primary Judge for determination of whether there has been breach of the...