Repfix Industries Pty Ltd v FBD Group Pty Ltd (No. 2) [2020] NSWDC 594

Repfix Industries Pty Ltd v FBD Group Pty Ltd (No. 2) [2020] NSWDC 594

The plaintiff's claim failed and the cross-claimant obtained only nominal damages on a defensive cross-claim that failed to achieve its object of obtaining substantial damages to offset the plaintiff's claim. The practical result was that both claims failed, and separate costs orders would substantially offset each other. The appropriate exercise of the costs discretion was therefore to reject the defendant's lump sum costs application and make no order as to costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Costs Determination Following Judgment on Statement of Claim and Cross Claim / On the Papers After Reasons for Judgment Delivered on 8 September 2020
Outcome
Statement of Claim dismissed; cross-claim otherwise dismissed after nominal damages of $300 awarded to the cross-claimant; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['costs Following the Event' 'discretionary Costs Orders' 'lump Sum Costs Order' 'nominal Damages' 'cross Claim for Defective Works']
['costs' 'civil Procedure' 'contract'] ['costs Following the Event' 'discretionary Costs Orders' 'lump Sum Costs Order' 'nominal Damages' 'cross Claim for Defective Works']

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

Civil Costs Determination Following Judgment on Statement of Claim and Cross Claim / On the Papers After Reasons for Judgment Delivered on 8 September 2020

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the defendant should receive its costs of the plaintiff's failed claim on a fixed lump sum basis." "Whether the cross-claimant, having obtained only nominal damages, should pay the cross-defendant's costs of the cross-claim." "What costs order best reflected the practical outcome where the plaintiff's claim failed and the cross-claim substantially failed."]

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's claim failed and the cross-claimant obtained only nominal damages on a defensive cross-claim that failed to achieve its object of obtaining substantial damages to offset the plaintiff's claim. The practical result was that both claims failed, and separate costs orders would substantially offset each other. The appropriate exercise of the costs discretion was therefore to reject the defendant's lump sum costs application and make no order as to costs.

Court Disposition

Statement of Claim dismissed; cross-claim otherwise dismissed after nominal damages of $300 awarded to the cross-claimant; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['The Statement of Claim is dismissed.' 'I order the cross-defendant to pay the cross-claimant the sum of $300 as nominal damages, but otherwise dismiss the cross-claim.' 'No order is made as to costs.']