Secure Parking Pty Limited v Ralan Property Services Pty Limited (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 661

Secure Parking Pty Limited v Ralan Property Services Pty Limited (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 661

The applications for costs orders against Mr Macphillamy were misconceived, as each claimant ought to have known their applications could not succeed given the issues were not raised or supported in the Local Court, and thus indemnity costs were appropriate in favour of Mr Macphillamy from the commencement of the proceedings.

Parties
Plaintiff/second Cross Defendant: Secure Parking Pty Limited; First Defendant/cross Claimant: Ralan Property Services Pty Limited; Second Defendant/first Cross Defendant: Richard Macphillamy
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Costs Application Following Refusal of Leave to Appeal Local Court Costs Order / Post Judgment Costs Ruling
Outcome
Orders as to costs made. Indemnity costs awarded to Mr Macphillamy; costs to Ralan; no order as to Secure Parking's costs of the cross-summons.
Legal Topics
Indemnity Costs, Calderbank Offer, Summary Disposal of Misconceived Applications
Costs Civil Procedure Indemnity Costs Calderbank Offer Summary Disposal of Misconceived Applications

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Secure Parking Pty Limited

Plaintiff/second Cross Defendant

Ralan Property Services Pty Limited

First Defendant/cross Claimant

Richard Macphillamy

Second Defendant/first Cross Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs Application Following Refusal of Leave to Appeal Local Court Costs Order / Post Judgment Costs Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether indemnity costs should be ordered against Secure Parking and/or Ralan in favour of Mr Macphillamy
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings against Mr Macphillamy were always misconceived with no real prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

The applications for costs orders against Mr Macphillamy were misconceived, as each claimant ought to have known their applications could not succeed given the issues were not raised or supported in the Local Court, and thus indemnity costs were appropriate in favour of Mr Macphillamy from the commencement of the proceedings.

Court Disposition

Orders as to costs made. Indemnity costs awarded to Mr Macphillamy; costs to Ralan; no order as to Secure Parking's costs of the cross-summons.

Orders

  • Secure Parking to pay Ralan's costs of the summons assessed on the ordinary basis.
  • Secure Parking to pay Mr Macphillamy's costs of the summons assessed on the indemnity basis.