Big Un Limited (in liquidation) v Evertz (No 3) [2024] NSWSC 1048

Although Mr Corner was successful in obtaining relief from most procedural requirements, his success was qualified by important concessions regarding disclosure. Applying a broad-brush evaluation of the mixed outcome, the event justifies a costs order in Mr Corner's favour but with a 20% reduction to reflect partial (not complete) success.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 20 August 2024
Procedural Posture: Notice of Motion (costs) / Post Substantive Judgment, Costs Determination
Outcome: Costs order: the first and third defendants to pay 80% of the fourth defendant's costs of the notice of motion.
Legal Topics: ['costs' 'mixed Outcome' 'apportionment of Costs' 'discretion in Awarding Costs']

['civil Procedure' 'commercial'] ['costs' 'mixed Outcome' 'apportionment of Costs' 'discretion in Awarding Costs']

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

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion (costs) / Post Substantive Judgment, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

1 ['How should costs be apportioned where an applicant was only partially successful in obtaining procedural relief?' 'Should the general rule that costs follow the event be modified where the outcome is mixed?']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Costs order: the first and third defendants to pay 80% of the fourth defendant's costs of the notice of motion.

Orders

["The first and third defendants are to pay 80% of the fourth defendant's costs of the notice of motion filed 18 April 2024."]