Louisiana Properties Pty Ltd v Hakea Holdings Pty Ltd; Hakea Holdings Pty Ltd v Louisiana Properties Pty Ltd [2018] NSWLEC 39

Louisiana Properties Pty Ltd v Hakea Holdings Pty Ltd; Hakea Holdings Pty Ltd v Louisiana Properties Pty Ltd [2018] NSWLEC 39

Louisiana succeeded on all principal contested elements in the respective proceedings. There was no basis to depart from statutory or rule-based presumptions that costs follow the event. Neither party's offers, including Calderbank offers, warranted indemnity costs. Hakea and Caverstock (jointly and severally) must pay Louisiana's costs of the Land and Environment Court proceedings; Hakea to pay Louisiana's costs of the Supreme Court proceedings and cross-claim. Caverstock alone not to bear costs in costs proceedings. Orders for costs are on the ordinary party-party basis, as agreed or assessed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Class 4 Civil Proceedings / Costs Determination Following Substantive Judgments
Outcome
Costs awarded to Louisiana Properties Pty Ltd as agreed or assessed on ordinary party-party basis; Hakea Holdings Pty Ltd and Caverstock Group Pty Limited (land case) jointly and severally liable; Hakea Holdings Pty Ltd solely liable for costs hearing.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'easements' 'asset Protection Zone' 'trespass' 'damages' 'remediation']
['civil Procedure' 'property Law' 'environmental Law'] ['costs' 'easements' 'asset Protection Zone' 'trespass' 'damages' 'remediation']

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

Class 4 Civil Proceedings / Costs Determination Following Substantive Judgments

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Appropriate costs orders in proceedings involving easement application, cross-claim for trespass, and environmental remediation' 'Whether indemnity costs orders should be made based on Calderbank offers' 'Application of statutory presumptions and general rules regarding costs']

Ratio Decidendi

Louisiana succeeded on all principal contested elements in the respective proceedings. There was no basis to depart from statutory or rule-based presumptions that costs follow the event. Neither party's offers, including Calderbank offers, warranted indemnity costs. Hakea and Caverstock (jointly and severally) must pay Louisiana's costs of the Land and Environment Court proceedings; Hakea to pay Louisiana's costs of the Supreme Court proceedings and cross-claim. Caverstock alone not to bear costs in costs proceedings. Orders for costs are on the ordinary party-party basis, as agreed or assessed.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to Louisiana Properties Pty Ltd as agreed or assessed on ordinary party-party basis; Hakea Holdings Pty Ltd and Caverstock Group Pty Limited (land case) jointly and severally liable; Hakea Holdings Pty Ltd solely liable for costs hearing.

Orders

  • ["In Matter No 322081 of 2016, Applicant (Hakea) to pay Respondent's (Louisiana) costs as agreed or assessed on party-party basis." "In the cross-claim in Matter No 322081 of 2016, Respondent on the cross-claim (Hakea) to pay Applicant's (Louisiana) costs as agreed or assessed on party-party basis." "In Matter No...