DIAMOND v BAULKHAM HILLS SHIRE COUNCIL & ORS [1999] NSWCA 277

DIAMOND v BAULKHAM HILLS SHIRE COUNCIL & ORS [1999] NSWCA 277

Leave to appeal was refused because no error was shown in Sheahan J's discretionary decision to order costs personally against Mr Diamond. Tinda was found to be a man of straw, Mr Diamond had played an active role and had a sufficient interest in the proceedings, advance notice was not required in the circumstances, and the earlier security for costs order did not prevent a later non-party costs order after the security was not provided.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 July 1999
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From a Land and Environment Court Costs Decision
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['security for Costs' 'non Party Costs Orders' 'leave to Appeal' 'discretionary Error']
['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['security for Costs' 'non Party Costs Orders' 'leave to Appeal' 'discretionary Error']

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 Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From a Land and Environment Court Costs Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Land and Environment Court judge erred in ordering costs personally against Mr Diamond, a non-party to the proceedings.' 'Whether Mr Diamond required a financial interest in the proceedings before a non-party costs order could be made against him.' 'Whether lack of advance notice that a costs order would be sought against Mr Diamond precluded the order.' 'Whether an order for costs against a non-party is unavailable where security for costs had been sought and ordered.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because no error was shown in Sheahan J's discretionary decision to order costs personally against Mr Diamond. Tinda was found to be a man of straw, Mr Diamond had played an active role and had a sufficient interest in the proceedings, advance notice was not required in the circumstances, and the earlier security for costs order did not prevent a later non-party costs order after the security was not provided.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.']