Constantinidis & Anor v Landcorp (NSW) Pty Ltd (in liq) & Ors [2011] NSWSC 872

Constantinidis & Anor v Landcorp (NSW) Pty Ltd (in liq) & Ors [2011] NSWSC 872

DOHMC was entitled to its costs of the proceedings because Macready AsJ's determination that the Plaintiffs had not established a serious question to be tried against DOHMC, due to deficiencies in the description of the unit in the correspondence relied on, showed that the Plaintiffs' application to extend the caveat could not have succeeded; the Plaintiffs' further submissions did not justify a different costs result.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Costs / Determination of Costs Following Judgment on Dohmc's Motion
Outcome
Plaintiffs ordered to pay DOHMC's costs of the proceedings, including the costs of the Motion, as agreed or as assessed.
Legal Topics
['costs of Proceedings' 'application to Extend Caveat' 'leave to Proceed Against Company in Liquidation' 'controlled Moneys Account']
['costs' 'corporations' 'equity'] ['costs of Proceedings' 'application to Extend Caveat' 'leave to Proceed Against Company in Liquidation' 'controlled Moneys Account']

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 / Determination of Costs Following Judgment on Dohmc's Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Plaintiffs should pay DOHMC's costs of the proceedings including the Motion." "Whether the Plaintiffs' application to extend the caveat could have succeeded had the caveat not been withdrawn by agreement." 'Whether matters raised by the Plaintiffs justified departing from an order that costs be paid to DOHMC.']

Ratio Decidendi

DOHMC was entitled to its costs of the proceedings because Macready AsJ's determination that the Plaintiffs had not established a serious question to be tried against DOHMC, due to deficiencies in the description of the unit in the correspondence relied on, showed that the Plaintiffs' application to extend the caveat could not have succeeded; the Plaintiffs' further submissions did not justify a different costs result.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs ordered to pay DOHMC's costs of the proceedings, including the costs of the Motion, as agreed or as assessed.

Orders

  • ["The Plaintiffs pay DOHMC's costs of the proceedings, including the costs of the Motion, as agreed or as assessed."]