Pillar v Arthur [1912] HCA 51

Pillar v Arthur [1912] HCA 51

Rule 365 is valid and allows the Judge discretion to award costs on the scale applicable to the amount claimed, notwithstanding that the amount recovered was less than £10; the Supreme Court's interpretation in Ex parte Goebel applies, and the relevant statutory provisions do not prohibit such an order. The appeal is dismissed.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: John Pillar; Respondent/plaintiff: John Arthur
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 August 1912
Procedural Posture
Appeal / High Court of Australia on Appeal From the Supreme Court of New South Wales
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Costs, District Court Proceedings, Interpretation of Statutes
Civil Procedure Costs District Court Proceedings Interpretation of Statutes

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 2 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Pillar

Appellant/defendant

John Arthur

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Appeal / High Court of Australia on Appeal From the Supreme Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether, under the District Courts Act 1901 (NSW), sec. 32, a plaintiff recovering less than £10 when suing for a higher sum may be awarded costs on the lower scale
  2. 2 Whether Rule 365 of the District Court Rules 1899 is ultra vires

Ratio Decidendi

Rule 365 is valid and allows the Judge discretion to award costs on the scale applicable to the amount claimed, notwithstanding that the amount recovered was less than £10; the Supreme Court's interpretation in Ex parte Goebel applies, and the relevant statutory provisions do not prohibit such an order. The appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.