Twelve Walker Street Pty Ltd v Lee (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 273

Twelve Walker Street Pty Ltd v Lee (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 273

Plaintiffs' grounds did not warrant departure from the ordinary rule under s 88K(5) that the applicant pays the costs, as defendants' conduct did not amount to unreasonableness and delays did not cause significant prejudice or wasted costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Variation of Costs Order Following Easement Proceedings / Decision on Costs Application
Outcome
Application to vary cost order refused; plaintiffs' application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'easements' 'civil Procedure']
['equity'] ['costs' 'easements' 'civil Procedure']

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

Application for Variation of Costs Order Following Easement Proceedings / Decision on Costs Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether court should depart from ordinary rule that applicant pays costs under s 88K Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) due to alleged unreasonable conduct by defendants']

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiffs' grounds did not warrant departure from the ordinary rule under s 88K(5) that the applicant pays the costs, as defendants' conduct did not amount to unreasonableness and delays did not cause significant prejudice or wasted costs.

Court Disposition

Application to vary cost order refused; plaintiffs' application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ["Plaintiffs' application to vary the costs order made on 20 December 2017 is dismissed with costs."]