Hu v Kim [2019] NSWSC 448
Costs should follow the event as the defendants failed to demonstrate their defence was reasonable. The Second Defendant's claim for indemnity under clause 32.3 of the Second Contract was rejected because the liability for costs did not arise 'as a result of' the First Contract, but rather under the Second Contract.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 23 April 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Equity Real Property / Judgment After Settlement and Written Submissions Re Costs and Cross Claim
- Outcome
- Defendants to pay plaintiffs' costs; Cross-claim dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['party/party Costs' 'indemnity Construction' 'specific Performance' 'novation of Contract' 'subdivisions']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Equity Real Property / Judgment After Settlement and Written Submissions Re Costs and Cross Claim
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether costs should follow the event where proceedings were settled pre-hearing but defendants unreasonably resisted claims' 'Whether second defendant was entitled to indemnity from first defendant under Second Contract for costs incurred in proceedings']
Ratio Decidendi
Costs should follow the event as the defendants failed to demonstrate their defence was reasonable. The Second Defendant's claim for indemnity under clause 32.3 of the Second Contract was rejected because the liability for costs did not arise 'as a result of' the First Contract, but rather under the Second Contract.
Court Disposition
Defendants to pay plaintiffs' costs; Cross-claim dismissed
Orders
- ["Defendants to pay plaintiffs' costs" 'Cross-claim by Second Defendant against First Defendant dismissed']
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