Tin-Tagel Majikk Pty Ltd v Hockey [2024] NSWSC 1330

Tin-Tagel Majikk Pty Ltd v Hockey [2024] NSWSC 1330

The plaintiffs are to pay the eighth defendant’s costs of the proceedings on the ordinary basis. The appointment of receivers to Danc Pty Ltd was a consequence of Danc’s own default and not a supervening event justifying any departure from the default costs rule. The plaintiffs’ refusal to accept Calderbank offers prior to the appointment of receivers was not unreasonable; therefore, indemnity costs are not awarded. Mediation costs are included as part of the proceedings’ costs in the absence of contrary agreement. A gross sum order of $31,000 is appropriate.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Tin-Tagel Majikk Pty Ltd; Second Plaintiff: Danc Pty Ltd; Third Plaintiff: Kenneth Roy Folley; Fourth Plaintiff: Kathryn Mary Folley; Fifth Plaintiff: Majjik Pty Ltd; Eighth Defendant: Christian Purdue; Ninth Defendant: Mandy King
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Costs Application Following Discontinuance / Post Discontinuance, Costs Determination
Outcome
Plaintiffs ordered to pay eighth defendant’s costs in the sum of $31,000
Legal Topics
Costs, Discontinuance, Calderbank Offers, Mediation Costs
Civil Procedure Costs Discontinuance Calderbank Offers Mediation Costs

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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tin-Tagel Majikk Pty Ltd

First Plaintiff

Danc Pty Ltd

Second Plaintiff

Kenneth Roy Folley

Third Plaintiff

Kathryn Mary Folley

Fourth Plaintiff

Majjik Pty Ltd

Fifth Plaintiff

Christian Purdue

Eighth Defendant

Mandy King

Ninth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs Application Following Discontinuance / Post Discontinuance, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiffs should pay the eighth defendant’s costs after discontinuance of proceedings against eighth and ninth defendants
  2. 2 Whether appointment of receivers was a supervening event justifying departure from ordinary costs rule
  3. 3 Whether costs should be on an indemnity basis due to refusal of Calderbank offers

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs are to pay the eighth defendant’s costs of the proceedings on the ordinary basis. The appointment of receivers to Danc Pty Ltd was a consequence of Danc’s own default and not a supervening event justifying any departure from the default costs rule. The plaintiffs’ refusal to accept Calderbank offers prior to the appointment of receivers was not unreasonable; therefore, indemnity costs are not awarded. Mediation costs are included as part of the proceedings’ costs in the absence of contrary agreement. A gross sum order of $31,000 is appropriate.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs ordered to pay eighth defendant’s costs in the sum of $31,000

Orders

  • Plaintiffs to pay the eighth defendant's costs in the sum of $31,000