Armstrong Jones Management Pty Ltd v Saies-Bond & Associates Pty Ltd ( No 2) [2007] NSWADT 58

Armstrong Jones Management Pty Ltd v Saies-Bond & Associates Pty Ltd ( No 2) [2007] NSWADT 58

None of the eight grounds advanced by Saies-Bond, considered individually or cumulatively, established special circumstances warranting an award of costs under s 88 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997. Armstrong Jones's conduct was not shown to be vexatious, unreasonable, unmeritorious, or otherwise sufficient to justify a costs order, and the Calderbank criteria were not met because Saies-Bond's $85,000 offer exceeded the amount awarded.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Retail Lease Proceedings; Application for Costs / On the Papers After Substantive Decision
Outcome
The Respondent/Cross Applicant's application for a costs order was dismissed.
Legal Topics
['special Circumstances for Costs' 'pre Lease Misrepresentation' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'calderbank Offer' 'mediation' 'compliance With Tribunal Directions']
['retail Leases' 'costs' 'administrative Law'] ['special Circumstances for Costs' 'pre Lease Misrepresentation' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'calderbank Offer' 'mediation' 'compliance With Tribunal Directions']

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

Retail Lease Proceedings; Application for Costs / On the Papers After Substantive Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Saies-Bond established special circumstances warranting an award of costs under s 88(1) of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997.' 'Whether Armstrong Jones acted vexatiously or unreasonably in interlocutory proceedings, mediation, settlement negotiations, compliance with directions, production of documents, or dealings with other tenants.' 'Whether any offer of settlement justified a costs order on Calderbank principles.']

Ratio Decidendi

None of the eight grounds advanced by Saies-Bond, considered individually or cumulatively, established special circumstances warranting an award of costs under s 88 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997. Armstrong Jones's conduct was not shown to be vexatious, unreasonable, unmeritorious, or otherwise sufficient to justify a costs order, and the Calderbank criteria were not met because Saies-Bond's $85,000 offer exceeded the amount awarded.

Court Disposition

The Respondent/Cross Applicant's application for a costs order was dismissed.

Orders

  • ["The Respondent/Cross Applicant's application for a costs order is dismissed"]