Kanjian Holdings No 1 Pty Ltd v Kanjian; Kanjian v Kanjian (No 4) [2021] NSWSC 1390

Given mixed outcomes, late abandonment of claims, and that both principal parties succeeded and failed on significant issues, the fairest global order is that Loris and Ken each bear their own costs as between them across both proceedings. However, Ken must pay 85% of Kanjian Holdings and the siblings' costs (on an ordinary basis) for defending his cross-claim (ASFCC) but no costs for the claim for documents, and there is no order for costs concerning Kanjian Holdings' discontinued cross-claim due to a supervening event. Indemnity costs and non-party costs orders were not warranted by the conduct of any party.

Parties: Plaintiff/first Cross Defendant (2018/150768); Second Defendant (2018/258352): Kanjian Holdings No 1 Pty Ltd (ACN 002 862 660); First Defendant/first Cross Claimant (2018/150768); First Defendant/cross Claimant (2018/258352): Kenneth Kanjian; Second Cross Defendant (2018/150768): Phillip Kanjian; Third Cross Defendant (2018/150768): Victor Kanjian; Fourth Cross Defendant (2018/150768): Marianne Yaghljian; Fifth Cross Defendant (2018/150768); Plaintiff/first Cross Defendant (2018/258352): Loris Sarkis Kanjian; Sixth Cross Defendant (2018/150768); Fourth Defendant/second Cross Defendant (2018/258352): Sonia Kanjian; Third Defendant (2018/258352): Sahab Holdings Pty Ltd (ACN 002 728 216)
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 29 October 2021
Procedural Posture: Equity and Corporations Proceedings (costs Hearing) / Post Judgment Determination of Costs
Outcome: Global costs order as between Loris and Ken: each to bear their own costs in both proceedings; Ken to pay 85% of Kanjian Holdings and the siblings' costs of his cross-claim in the Corporations proceedings (2018/150768); no order as to costs for Kanjian Holdings' claim for documents or for its discontinued...
Legal Topics: Costs Orders, Exceptions to General Rule on Costs, Abandonment/discontinuance of Claims, Claims Involving Dishonesty, Undue Influence, Duress, Fraud, Indemnity Costs, Cross Claims, Mixed Outcome Proceedings

Costs Equity Corporations Costs Orders Exceptions to General Rule on Costs Abandonment/discontinuance of Claims Claims Involving Dishonesty, Undue Influence, Duress, Fraud Indemnity Costs +2 more

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 7 Authorities cited 51 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Kanjian Holdings No 1 Pty Ltd (ACN 002 862 660)

Plaintiff/first Cross Defendant (2018/150768); Second Defendant (2018/258352)

Kenneth Kanjian

First Defendant/first Cross Claimant (2018/150768); First Defendant/cross Claimant (2018/258352)

Phillip Kanjian

Second Cross Defendant (2018/150768)

Victor Kanjian

Third Cross Defendant (2018/150768)

Marianne Yaghljian

Fourth Cross Defendant (2018/150768)

Loris Sarkis Kanjian

Fifth Cross Defendant (2018/150768); Plaintiff/first Cross Defendant (2018/258352)

Sonia Kanjian

Sixth Cross Defendant (2018/150768); Fourth Defendant/second Cross Defendant (2018/258352)

Sahab Holdings Pty Ltd (ACN 002 728 216)

Third Defendant (2018/258352)

Procedural Posture

Equity and Corporations Proceedings (costs Hearing) / Post Judgment Determination of Costs

Legal Issues

1 How should costs be apportioned in two related proceedings concerning mixed success, abandoned claims, and serious allegations between family members?
2 Should any party be deprived of costs or awarded indemnity costs due to alleged misconduct or unfounded allegations?

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Global costs order as between Loris and Ken: each to bear their own costs in both proceedings; Ken to pay 85% of Kanjian Holdings and the siblings' costs of his cross-claim in the Corporations proceedings (2018/150768); no order as to costs for Kanjian Holdings' claim for documents or for its discontinued...

Orders

Declare invalid the 2017 enduring power of attorney granted by the Sixth Cross-Defendant to the Second Cross-Defendant.
Declare that the 2014 enduring power of attorney granted by the Sixth Cross-Defendant to the Cross-Claimant, Third and Fourth Cross-Defendants remains valid.