Hurford Hardwood Kempsey Pty Ltd v Kempsey Timbers (Sawmilling) Pty Ltd (No 5) [2020] NSWSC 287

Hurford Hardwood Kempsey Pty Ltd v Kempsey Timbers (Sawmilling) Pty Ltd (No 5) [2020] NSWSC 287

The criteria for making a non-party costs order were not satisfied, as there was insufficient evidence that the non-parties' actions were unreasonable, improper, or directly caused frustration or increase in costs. The conduct complained of did not warrant departure from the usual rule that costs orders are made against losing parties, and even if otherwise, the application was procedurally barred by the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 36.16(3A), as it was not made within 14 days of the original costs order.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Non Party Costs Order / Post Judgment Application Determined in Equity Division, Commercial List
Outcome
Application for non-party costs order dismissed
Legal Topics
['non Party Costs Orders' 'variation of Costs Orders' 'civil Procedure' 'administration and Insolvency']
['costs'] ['non Party Costs Orders' 'variation of Costs Orders' 'civil Procedure' 'administration and Insolvency']

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

Application for Non Party Costs Order / Post Judgment Application Determined in Equity Division, Commercial List

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a non-party costs order should be made against Dr Head, Oakley Investments Pty Ltd and Beebo Pty Ltd for the costs of the proceedings' 'Whether the application for a non-party costs order is barred by Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 36.16(3A)' 'Whether s 14 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) could be used to extend the 14-day time limit for varying final costs orders']

Ratio Decidendi

The criteria for making a non-party costs order were not satisfied, as there was insufficient evidence that the non-parties' actions were unreasonable, improper, or directly caused frustration or increase in costs. The conduct complained of did not warrant departure from the usual rule that costs orders are made against losing parties, and even if otherwise, the application was procedurally barred by the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 36.16(3A), as it was not made within 14 days of the original costs order.

Court Disposition

Application for non-party costs order dismissed

Orders

  • ["Hurford's notice of motion of 17 February 2020 dismissed." 'Court reserved question of costs of the application.']