Ventura v Higgins (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 1188
Although the defendants obtained a stay, they were effectively seeking an indulgence due to their own delay, and the plaintiffs did not unreasonably oppose the application but were unsuccessful. Each party should bear their own costs of the notice of motion as the fair order in the circumstances.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 01 August 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Notice of Motion for Stay of Judgment for Costs / Costs Determination Following Principal Judgment
- Outcome
- No order as to costs; each party to the notice of motion pays their own costs.
- Legal Topics
- ['costs' 'stay of Judgment' 'assessment of Costs']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion for Stay of Judgment for Costs / Costs Determination Following Principal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether there should be an order for costs in relation to the notice of motion seeking a stay of judgment for costs until assessment of opposing party’s costs is complete']
Ratio Decidendi
Although the defendants obtained a stay, they were effectively seeking an indulgence due to their own delay, and the plaintiffs did not unreasonably oppose the application but were unsuccessful. Each party should bear their own costs of the notice of motion as the fair order in the circumstances.
Court Disposition
No order as to costs; each party to the notice of motion pays their own costs.
Orders
- ['The Court makes no order for the costs of the notice of motion filed in the District Court of New South Wales at Newcastle on 15 February 2018, with the intent that each of the parties to the notice of motion will pay his or its own costs.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment