The University of Sydney v Multiplex Constructions Pty Ltd (No 3) [2023] NSWSC 1362
Because the University proposed to introduce new allegations concerning the Alleged Sandstone Defect and Alleged Thermal Insulation Defect and then abandoned those proposed amendments and the related pre-evidence disclosure application, the Court could not conclude that the defendants' resistance to the amendment application was unreasonable or that they unreasonably incurred costs in resisting it. The University was therefore ordered to pay the relevant defendants' costs of the motion, but it was not reasonable for the defendants to recover costs incurred in actually preparing to meet the abandoned defect claims or in preparing to give pre-evidence disclosure before leave or disclosure...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 10 November 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Costs; Equity Technology and Construction List / Determination on the Papers of Costs of the Plaintiff's Notice of Motion Filed 11 November 2022 After Leave to File a Second Further Amended Technology and Construction List Statement Was Granted
- Outcome
- Plaintiff ordered to pay the costs of the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, seventh and eighth defendants of the plaintiff's Notice of Motion filed 11 November 2022, subject to exclusions; no order as between the plaintiff and the ninth defendant; the sixth defendant's costs had already been ordered on 8...
- Legal Topics
- ['notice of Motion for Leave to Amend List Statement' 'costs of Amendment Application' 'abandoned Proposed Amendments' 'pre Evidence Discovery']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Costs; Equity Technology and Construction List / Determination on the Papers of Costs of the Plaintiff's Notice of Motion Filed 11 November 2022 After Leave to File a Second Further Amended Technology and Construction List Statement Was Granted
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether the plaintiff should pay the remaining defendants' costs incurred in relation to the plaintiff's Notice of Motion filed 11 November 2022." 'Whether any costs order should exclude costs incurred in preparing to meet the abandoned Alleged Sandstone Defect and Alleged Thermal Insulation Defect claims or in preparing to give pre-evidence disclosure.']
Ratio Decidendi
Because the University proposed to introduce new allegations concerning the Alleged Sandstone Defect and Alleged Thermal Insulation Defect and then abandoned those proposed amendments and the related pre-evidence disclosure application, the Court could not conclude that the defendants' resistance to the amendment application was unreasonable or that they unreasonably incurred costs in resisting it. The University was therefore ordered to pay the relevant defendants' costs of the motion, but it was not reasonable for the defendants to recover costs incurred in actually preparing to meet the abandoned defect claims or in preparing to give pre-evidence disclosure before leave or disclosure...
Court Disposition
Plaintiff ordered to pay the costs of the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, seventh and eighth defendants of the plaintiff's Notice of Motion filed 11 November 2022, subject to exclusions; no order as between the plaintiff and the ninth defendant; the sixth defendant's costs had already been ordered on 8...
Orders
- ["As between the plaintiff and the ninth defendant, there is to be no order in respect of the plaintiff's Notice of Motion filed 11 November 2022, to the extent that the plaintiff and the ninth defendant pay their own costs of the motion." "As between the plaintiff and the first, second, third, fourth, fifth,...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment