Gaskell v Nazha (No 2) [2022] NSWCATAP 30

As the appeal challenged only the costs order at first instance and did not relate to the amount claimed or in dispute, rule 38 does not apply; s 60 governs the costs of the appeal, and no special circumstances have been demonstrated to warrant an order for costs.

Parties: Appellant: Aaron Gaskell; Appellant: Serena Bourke; Respondent: Sam Nazha
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 04 February 2022
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Costs Determination After Appeal
Outcome: Costs order confirmed; parties to pay their own costs of the appeal; hearing dispensed with on the question of costs.
Legal Topics: Tribunal Costs Orders, Appeal Costs, Special Circumstances for Costs

Costs Tribunal Costs Orders Appeal Costs Special Circumstances for Costs

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2

Parties

Aaron Gaskell

Appellant

Serena Bourke

Appellant

Sam Nazha

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Costs Determination After Appeal

Legal Issues

1 Whether the costs of the appeal are to be determined by reference to rule 38(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 or s 60 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013
2 Whether special circumstances warrant an order for costs in respect of the appeal

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Costs order confirmed; parties to pay their own costs of the appeal; hearing dispensed with on the question of costs.

Orders

Pursuant to s 50(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, dispense with a hearing on the question of costs.
Order 1 made on 15 December 2021, namely that 'The parties are to pay their own costs of the appeal', is confirmed.