Pegela Pty Ltd v Oates (No 2) [2010] NSWCA 292

Pegela Pty Ltd v Oates (No 2) [2010] NSWCA 292

The Court refused to vary the orders because the respondents had raised costs matters too late, the parties had not addressed quantum with clarity at the appeal, there was clear evidence of admissions that $91,000 was owed, and the Court was not persuaded that any mistake required correction under the slip rule or that justice required setting aside the order and reopening quantum.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion to Vary Orders After Appeal / Consequential Orders
Outcome
Notice of motion dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['judgments and Orders' 'application to Vary Orders' 'slip Rule' 'costs']
['procedure'] ['judgments and Orders' 'application to Vary Orders' 'slip Rule' 'costs']

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

Notice of Motion to Vary Orders After Appeal / Consequential Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the respondents should be permitted to vary the verdict from $91,000 plus interest to $59,406.66 plus interest.' 'Whether the respondents should be permitted to vary the manner in which the costs below should be paid.' 'Whether there was a mistake requiring correction under UCPR, r 36.17 or a basis to reopen the order.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court refused to vary the orders because the respondents had raised costs matters too late, the parties had not addressed quantum with clarity at the appeal, there was clear evidence of admissions that $91,000 was owed, and the Court was not persuaded that any mistake required correction under the slip rule or that justice required setting aside the order and reopening quantum.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Notice of motion dismissed with costs.']