Hashman v Australian Medico-Legal Group Pty Ltd & anor; Claireleigh Mosman Pty Ltd & anor v Australian Medico-Legal Group Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 496

Hashman v Australian Medico-Legal Group Pty Ltd & anor; Claireleigh Mosman Pty Ltd & anor v Australian Medico-Legal Group Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 496

The loan judgment was corrected because filing fees, service fees and solicitors' costs had mistakenly been included in the judgment sum and the correction was unopposed. In the oppression case, Mr Hashman substantially succeeded because he had to litigate to obtain a share price exceeding any offer made by the defendants, and the failed or refined issues were not sufficiently discrete to justify depriving him of costs. In the loan case, AMLG was ordered to pay the costs of both plaintiffs because Claireleigh's pre-joinder costs would have been incurred by Mr Hashman had he been joined from the outset and imposed no practical additional costs on the defendants. Indemnity costs were...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Costs Judgment in Oppression and Loan Proceedings; Slip Rule Application / Costs and Correction of Judgment After Judgment Given on 7 December 2016
Outcome
Judgment corrected in the loan case; ordinary costs awarded to the plaintiffs; indemnity costs refused.
Legal Topics
['oppression Proceedings' 'compulsory Purchase Order' 'share Valuation' 'calderbank Offer' 'indemnity Costs' 'offer of Compromise' 'slip Rule' 'joinder']
['civil Procedure' 'costs' 'corporations' 'equity'] ['oppression Proceedings' 'compulsory Purchase Order' 'share Valuation' 'calderbank Offer' 'indemnity Costs' 'offer of Compromise' 'slip Rule' 'joinder']

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 Judgment in Oppression and Loan Proceedings; Slip Rule Application / Costs and Correction of Judgment After Judgment Given on 7 December 2016

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the judgment sum in the loan case should be corrected under UCPR r 36.17 from $329,094.66 to $326,979.66.' "Whether Mr Hashman substantially succeeded in the oppression case and should receive costs despite the share price being fixed between the parties' competing positions." 'Whether costs should be reduced or apportioned because the defendants succeeded on some issues, including the Corporations Act, s 254T issue and aspects of valuation evidence.' "Whether AMLG should pay the costs of both plaintiffs in the loan case, including costs incurred before Mr Hashman's joinder." 'Whether the plaintiffs should receive indemnity costs in the loan case after a Calderbank offer made on 25 November 2016.']

Ratio Decidendi

The loan judgment was corrected because filing fees, service fees and solicitors' costs had mistakenly been included in the judgment sum and the correction was unopposed. In the oppression case, Mr Hashman substantially succeeded because he had to litigate to obtain a share price exceeding any offer made by the defendants, and the failed or refined issues were not sufficiently discrete to justify depriving him of costs. In the loan case, AMLG was ordered to pay the costs of both plaintiffs because Claireleigh's pre-joinder costs would have been incurred by Mr Hashman had he been joined from the outset and imposed no practical additional costs on the defendants. Indemnity costs were...

Court Disposition

Judgment corrected in the loan case; ordinary costs awarded to the plaintiffs; indemnity costs refused.

Orders

  • ['In proceedings 15/187123, pursuant to UCPR r 36.17, the judgment given on 7 December 2016 be corrected by substituting the sum of $326,979.66 for the sum of $329,094.66.' "In proceedings 15/187123, the defendant pay the costs of both plaintiffs of the proceedings, including of the second plaintiff's joinder...