Sheridan International Pty Limited & Ors v C.S. Brooks Inc. [2005] NSWSC 218

Sheridan International Pty Limited & Ors v C.S. Brooks Inc. [2005] NSWSC 218

The Court determined that, since CS Brooks was successful on the majority of claims, excepting the Trade Practices Act issue, and both parties had incurred substantial costs due to amended pleadings, a principled approach warranted Mr Moore paying 80% of CS Brooks' costs related to the amended notice of motion.

Parties
Cross Defendant to the First Cross Claim: Andrew Barrington Moore; Defendant; Cross Claimant to First and Second Cross Claim: C.S. Brooks Inc.; First Plaintiff: Sheridan International Pty Limited; Second Plaintiff: Sheridan Australia Pty Limited; Third Plaintiff: Sheridan U.S. Inc.; Cross Defendants to the Second Cross Claim: Francis Keith Alfredson & Ors trading as Arthur Andersen
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Commercial List Proceeding / Costs Determination Following Amended Notice of Motion
Outcome
Mr Moore ordered to pay 80% of CS Brooks' costs of and incidental to the Amended Notice of Motion filed 28 February 2005.
Legal Topics
Costs, Cross Claims, Trade Practices Act
Equity Commercial Law Costs Cross Claims Trade Practices Act

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

Parties

Andrew Barrington Moore

Cross Defendant to the First Cross Claim

C.S. Brooks Inc.

Defendant; Cross Claimant to First and Second Cross Claim

Sheridan International Pty Limited

First Plaintiff

Sheridan Australia Pty Limited

Second Plaintiff

Sheridan U.S. Inc.

Third Plaintiff

Francis Keith Alfredson & Ors trading as Arthur Andersen

Cross Defendants to the Second Cross Claim

Procedural Posture

Commercial List Proceeding / Costs Determination Following Amended Notice of Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Entitlement to costs arising from amended notice of motion addressing cross-claim causes of action under Trade Practices Act, Fair Trading Act, and other equitable claims

Ratio Decidendi

The Court determined that, since CS Brooks was successful on the majority of claims, excepting the Trade Practices Act issue, and both parties had incurred substantial costs due to amended pleadings, a principled approach warranted Mr Moore paying 80% of CS Brooks' costs related to the amended notice of motion.

Court Disposition

Mr Moore ordered to pay 80% of CS Brooks' costs of and incidental to the Amended Notice of Motion filed 28 February 2005.

Orders

  • The defendant to the first cross-claim, Mr Moore, pay 80% of CS Brooks' costs of and incidental to the Amended Notice of Motion filed 28 February 2005.