Salmon v Albarran (No 4) [2022] NSWSC 114

Salmon v Albarran (No 4) [2022] NSWSC 114

It was appropriate to order payment on account of interlocutory costs thrown away where plaintiffs’ amendments to pleadings abandoned causes of action, with the wasted defence costs to be fixed in a broad, impressionistic way. Orders for payment on account were justified to avoid unnecessary detailed assessment and reflected wasted work up to the point of amendment. Quantum was set with regard to estimates, the nature of the amendments, and absence of contrary evidence from the plaintiffs. Interlocutory costs orders in the applicants' favour were made on the ordinary basis, since their applications were discrete and opposed, and the applicants obtained material relief.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Motion (costs Interlocutory) / Post Interlocutory, Costs Determination Following Amendment of Pleadings
Outcome
Orders for payment by plaintiffs of sums on account of costs thrown away and interlocutory costs of motions, fixed at $50,000 (Hall Chadwick Partners) and $20,000 (Mr Brown), to applicants; costs of motions awarded to applicants on usual interlocutory basis.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'interlocutory Costs' 'amendment of Pleadings' 'costs Thrown Away']
['civil Procedure' 'equity'] ['costs' 'interlocutory Costs' 'amendment of Pleadings' 'costs Thrown Away']

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

Motion (costs Interlocutory) / Post Interlocutory, Costs Determination Following Amendment of Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether to award fixed sum payments on account of interlocutory costs thrown away due to amendments to the statement of claim.' 'Whether to make interlocutory costs orders in favour of defendants against plaintiffs regarding amendments to pleading and motions.']

Ratio Decidendi

It was appropriate to order payment on account of interlocutory costs thrown away where plaintiffs’ amendments to pleadings abandoned causes of action, with the wasted defence costs to be fixed in a broad, impressionistic way. Orders for payment on account were justified to avoid unnecessary detailed assessment and reflected wasted work up to the point of amendment. Quantum was set with regard to estimates, the nature of the amendments, and absence of contrary evidence from the plaintiffs. Interlocutory costs orders in the applicants' favour were made on the ordinary basis, since their applications were discrete and opposed, and the applicants obtained material relief.

Court Disposition

Orders for payment by plaintiffs of sums on account of costs thrown away and interlocutory costs of motions, fixed at $50,000 (Hall Chadwick Partners) and $20,000 (Mr Brown), to applicants; costs of motions awarded to applicants on usual interlocutory basis.

Orders

  • ['Plaintiffs to pay Hall Chadwick Partners $50,000 on account of costs thrown away under order of 5 November 2021.' "Plaintiffs to pay Hall Chadwick Partners' costs of the motion (filed 20 April 2021)." 'Plaintiffs to pay Mr Brown $20,000 on account of costs thrown away under order of 5 November 2021.' "Plaintiffs...