Hardaker and Ors v Mana Island Resort (Fiji) Limited and Anor (No. 2) [2019] NSWSC 1100

Hardaker and Ors v Mana Island Resort (Fiji) Limited and Anor (No. 2) [2019] NSWSC 1100

The Court ordered that the costs ordered on 5 December 2018 be payable forthwith because the earlier Notice of Motion was a discrete threshold application that the Plaintiffs successfully resisted, the costs order stood and was not appealed, a substantial delay before final relief was likely, the Plaintiffs had a legitimate interest in recovering the costs without further delay, and it was in the interests of justice to depart from the ordinary rule under Rule 42.7(2) UCPR. Because the Plaintiffs also succeeded on the contested present Notice of Motion, the Defendants were ordered to pay those costs forthwith as well.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Costs Application Under Rule 42.7(2) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 / Notice of Motion Filed on 30 May 2019 Seeking That Costs Ordered on 5 December 2018 Be Payable Forthwith
Outcome
Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion granted; costs ordered payable forthwith.
Legal Topics
['costs Payable Forthwith' 'rule 42.7(2) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005' 'interlocutory Costs' 'discretion as to Costs' 'forum Non Conveniens Application']
['costs' 'civil Procedure'] ['costs Payable Forthwith' 'rule 42.7(2) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005' 'interlocutory Costs' 'discretion as to Costs' 'forum Non Conveniens Application']

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 Under Rule 42.7(2) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 / Notice of Motion Filed on 30 May 2019 Seeking That Costs Ordered on 5 December 2018 Be Payable Forthwith

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the costs ordered by the Court on 5 December 2018 should be payable forthwith under Rule 42.7(2) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005.' 'Whether the Plaintiffs should receive the costs of the Notice of Motion filed on 30 May 2019, and whether those costs should also be payable forthwith.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court ordered that the costs ordered on 5 December 2018 be payable forthwith because the earlier Notice of Motion was a discrete threshold application that the Plaintiffs successfully resisted, the costs order stood and was not appealed, a substantial delay before final relief was likely, the Plaintiffs had a legitimate interest in recovering the costs without further delay, and it was in the interests of justice to depart from the ordinary rule under Rule 42.7(2) UCPR. Because the Plaintiffs also succeeded on the contested present Notice of Motion, the Defendants were ordered to pay those costs forthwith as well.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion granted; costs ordered payable forthwith.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to Rule 42.7(2) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, the costs ordered by the Court on 5 December 2018 are payable by the Defendants forthwith.' "The Defendants are to pay the Plaintiffs' costs of the Notice of Motion filed on 30 May 2019, with those costs also to be payable forthwith."]