Citadel Property Group (Rockdale No 1) Pty Ltd & Ors v Capital Financial Australia Ltd & Ors (Costs) [2016] NSWSC 1182

Citadel Property Group (Rockdale No 1) Pty Ltd & Ors v Capital Financial Australia Ltd & Ors (Costs) [2016] NSWSC 1182

The dismissal of the proceedings for want of due despatch was an event in respect of which costs should follow. Although there was overlap between the main claim and the Cross-Claim and the plaintiffs' claims had earlier been characterised as substantially defensive, the plaintiffs brought the defendants to court, failed to prosecute complex and serious allegations over years, failed to comply with particulars orders, and abandoned claims without proper explanation. The fairest order was therefore that the plaintiffs pay the defendants' costs of the proceedings, with no order for costs of the Cross-Claim. A gross sum costs award was warranted because assessment would likely be lengthy,...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 August 2016
Procedural Posture
Costs Application in Equity Commercial List Proceedings / On the Papers After the Proceedings and Cross Claim Were Dismissed for Want of Due Despatch
Outcome
Plaintiffs ordered to pay defendants' costs of the proceedings by gross sum; no order as to costs of the Cross-Claim.
Legal Topics
['costs Following the Event' 'dismissal for Want of Due Despatch' 'cross Claim Costs' 'gross Sum Costs Order' 'costs Assessment']
['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['costs Following the Event' 'dismissal for Want of Due Despatch' 'cross Claim Costs' 'gross Sum Costs Order' 'costs Assessment']

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

Costs Application in Equity Commercial List Proceedings / On the Papers After the Proceedings and Cross Claim Were Dismissed for Want of Due Despatch

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiffs should pay the defendants' costs of proceedings dismissed for want of due despatch." 'Whether there should be any order as to costs of the Cross-Claim.' 'Whether a gross sum costs award should be made under s 98(4)(c) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005.' 'What gross sum costs amount was fair, logical and reasonable in the circumstances.']

Ratio Decidendi

The dismissal of the proceedings for want of due despatch was an event in respect of which costs should follow. Although there was overlap between the main claim and the Cross-Claim and the plaintiffs' claims had earlier been characterised as substantially defensive, the plaintiffs brought the defendants to court, failed to prosecute complex and serious allegations over years, failed to comply with particulars orders, and abandoned claims without proper explanation. The fairest order was therefore that the plaintiffs pay the defendants' costs of the proceedings, with no order for costs of the Cross-Claim. A gross sum costs award was warranted because assessment would likely be lengthy,...

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs ordered to pay defendants' costs of the proceedings by gross sum; no order as to costs of the Cross-Claim.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiffs are to pay the defendants' costs of the proceedings in the amount of $200,000 as against each plaintiff." 'There be no order as to costs of the Cross-Claim.']