Dr Praneal Dutt Sharma v Dr Phillip Segal and Dr Greg Chen [Costs] [2017] NSWSC 973

Dr Praneal Dutt Sharma v Dr Phillip Segal and Dr Greg Chen [Costs] [2017] NSWSC 973

There is no reason to depart from the primary rule that costs follow the event; differentiating costs by issue is inappropriate. The plaintiffs are to pay the costs of the proceedings of the first and third defendants.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Praneal Dutt Sharma; Second Plaintiff: Praneal Sharma & Associates Pty Ltd; First Defendant: Phillip Segal; Second Defendant: Greg Chen; Third Defendant: Melita Segal; Fourth Defendant: Yanyi Pty Limited; Fifth Defendant: South West Radiology Pty Ltd; Sixth Defendant: SWR Pty Ltd; Seventh Defendant: Park Central Radiology Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Post Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiffs are to pay the costs of the proceedings of the first and third defendants.
Legal Topics
Costs, Adjudication of Single Issue, Costs Follow the Event, Oppression Cases
Civil Procedure Costs Adjudication of Single Issue Costs Follow the Event Oppression Cases

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Praneal Dutt Sharma

First Plaintiff

Praneal Sharma & Associates Pty Ltd

Second Plaintiff

Phillip Segal

First Defendant

Greg Chen

Second Defendant

Melita Segal

Third Defendant

Yanyi Pty Limited

Fourth Defendant

South West Radiology Pty Ltd

Fifth Defendant

SWR Pty Ltd

Sixth Defendant

Park Central Radiology Pty Ltd

Seventh Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs Application / Post Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should be apportioned according to specific issues or follow the event in entirety
  2. 2 Whether usual rule that costs follow the event should be departed from

Ratio Decidendi

There is no reason to depart from the primary rule that costs follow the event; differentiating costs by issue is inappropriate. The plaintiffs are to pay the costs of the proceedings of the first and third defendants.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs are to pay the costs of the proceedings of the first and third defendants.

Orders

  • Plaintiffs are to pay the costs of the proceedings of the first defendant.
  • Plaintiffs are to pay the costs of the proceedings of the third defendant.