Gordon v Lever (No 3) [2020] NSWCA 44

Gordon v Lever (No 3) [2020] NSWCA 44

The Court declined to vary the costs order because, although the Gordons had substantial success on the appeal, the right of carriageway terms ultimately ordered were an amalgam of both parties' proposals, the Levers' position in the novel circumstances was understandable, and the same considerations that informed the costs assessment at first instance did not justify an indemnity costs variation based on the offer.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Costs Application in Appeal / Post Judgment Application to Vary Costs Order
Outcome
No variation of costs order
Legal Topics
['variation of Costs Order' 'indemnity Costs' 'calderbank Letter' 'right of Carriageway' 'easement']

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 Appeal / Post Judgment Application to Vary Costs Order

  1. 1 ['Whether the appeal costs order should be varied so that costs are assessed on the ordinary basis up to 4 April 2019 and on an indemnity basis thereafter.' "Whether the Gordons' without prejudice offer dated 4 April 2019 justified indemnity costs from the date of the offer."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Court declined to vary the costs order because, although the Gordons had substantial success on the appeal, the right of carriageway terms ultimately ordered were an amalgam of both parties' proposals, the Levers' position in the novel circumstances was understandable, and the same considerations that informed the costs assessment at first instance did not justify an indemnity costs variation based on the offer.

Court Disposition

No variation of costs order

Orders

  • ['No variation of costs order']