Brenchley v Clissold [2021] NSWCATAP 319

Brenchley v Clissold [2021] NSWCATAP 319

Rules 38 and 38A did not apply because the Appeal Panel had no evidence of the value by which the appellants might have been benefited or prejudiced by the decision under appeal and no means of determining whether the amount in dispute exceeded $30,000. Applying section 60 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, the Appeal Panel was not satisfied that special circumstances existed. The appeal was properly instituted, its duration was not excessive, there were valid reasons for its withdrawal after the Supreme Court proceedings were listed, and the first respondent did not establish that the appellants unduly prolonged the proceedings or otherwise conducted the appeal in a way...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Costs Application in an Internal Appeal to the Appeal Panel of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales / Decision on the Papers After the Appellants Withdrew the Appeal and the Appeal Was Dismissed by Consent Orders
Outcome
The first respondent's application for costs was dismissed and each party to the appeal was ordered to pay its own costs.
Legal Topics
['special Circumstances for Costs in Ncat' 'costs Where Appeal Withdrawn Without a Hearing on the Merits' 'internal Appeals' 'strata Scheme Dispute']
['civil Procedure' 'costs' 'strata Schemes'] ['special Circumstances for Costs in Ncat' 'costs Where Appeal Withdrawn Without a Hearing on the Merits' 'internal Appeals' 'strata Scheme Dispute']

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 Application in an Internal Appeal to the Appeal Panel of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales / Decision on the Papers After the Appellants Withdrew the Appeal and the Appeal Was Dismissed by Consent Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a hearing on costs should be dispensed with pursuant to section 50(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013.' 'Whether rules 38 and 38A of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 applied so that costs could be awarded without special circumstances.' 'Whether special circumstances existed under section 60 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 warranting an award of costs to the first respondent after the appellants withdrew the appeal.' 'Whether the appellants unreasonably prolonged the proceedings or brought a hopeless, frivolous or misconceived appeal.']

Ratio Decidendi

Rules 38 and 38A did not apply because the Appeal Panel had no evidence of the value by which the appellants might have been benefited or prejudiced by the decision under appeal and no means of determining whether the amount in dispute exceeded $30,000. Applying section 60 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, the Appeal Panel was not satisfied that special circumstances existed. The appeal was properly instituted, its duration was not excessive, there were valid reasons for its withdrawal after the Supreme Court proceedings were listed, and the first respondent did not establish that the appellants unduly prolonged the proceedings or otherwise conducted the appeal in a way...

Court Disposition

The first respondent's application for costs was dismissed and each party to the appeal was ordered to pay its own costs.

Orders

  • ['A hearing on costs is dispensed with pursuant to section 50(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013.' "The first respondent's application for costs be dismissed." 'Each party to the appeal is to pay its own costs.']