Kostov v YPOL Limited [2017] NSWSC 395

Kostov v YPOL Limited [2017] NSWSC 395

The plaintiff did not show any irregularity, illegality or want of good faith for the purposes of UCPR r 36.15. Although UCPR r 36.16(1) and r 36.16(2)(b) were potentially applicable, the plaintiff had been afforded an opportunity to be heard, the contempt hearing proceeded on the basis that the defendant bore the...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion to Set Aside Judgment Finding Contempt / Motion Dismissed
Outcome
The plaintiff's notice of motion to set aside the judgment was dismissed and the plaintiff was ordered to pay the defendant's costs of the motion.
Legal Topics
['setting Aside or Varying Judgment' 'absence of Party' 'finality of Litigation' 'adjournment' 'costs Follow the Event']
['practice and Procedure' 'contempt of Court' 'costs'] ['setting Aside or Varying Judgment' 'absence of Party' 'finality of Litigation' 'adjournment' 'costs Follow the Event']

Source-derived case record

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

Notice of Motion to Set Aside Judgment Finding Contempt / Motion Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the judgment of Fagan J made on 27 March 2017 should be set aside under UCPR r 36.15 as having been given or entered irregularly, illegally or against good faith.' "Whether the Court should exercise its power under UCPR r 36.16(1) or UCPR r 36.16(2)(b) to set aside or vary the judgment made in the plaintiff's absence." 'Whether the principle of finality weighed against reopening proceedings where the contempt charges had been heard and determined on the merits.' 'Whether costs of the motion should follow the event under UCPR r 42.1.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff did not show any irregularity, illegality or want of good faith for the purposes of UCPR r 36.15. Although UCPR r 36.16(1) and r 36.16(2)(b) were potentially applicable, the plaintiff had been afforded an opportunity to be heard, the contempt hearing proceeded on the basis that the defendant bore the requisite onus of proof, and the principle of finality made it inappropriate to reopen the determination of the contempt charges. Costs were ordered to follow the event.

Court Disposition

The plaintiff's notice of motion to set aside the judgment was dismissed and the plaintiff was ordered to pay the defendant's costs of the motion.

Orders

  • ["Dismiss the plaintiff's notice of motion filed 28 March 2017." "Order the plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs of the motion."]