Sethi v The Owners – Strata Plan 93392 (No 8) [2024] NSWSC 213

Sethi v The Owners – Strata Plan 93392 (No 8) [2024] NSWSC 213

A gross sum costs order was warranted because it would avoid delay, cost and aggravation of assessment, there was doubt about the plaintiff's capacity to meet costs, and the plaintiff's conduct unnecessarily and substantially increased the defendant's costs. The defendant's evidence was accurate and reliable enough to permit a fair broad-brush assessment. The plaintiff's request for a six-month extension was refused because it was unexplained, unsupported by his asserted other litigation, based on notices of motion filed after dismissal and contrary to Campbell J's direction, and inconsistent with the just, quick and cheap resolution of the remaining costs issue. After discounting...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Costs Application for a Gross Sum Costs Order Under S 98(4)(c) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (nsw) Following Summary Dismissal of the Plaintiff's Proceedings / On the Papers
Outcome
Application granted; the plaintiff was ordered to pay the defendant's costs of the proceedings and of the notice of motion filed 17 November 2023 in a gross sum.
Legal Topics
['gross Sum Costs Orders' 'indemnity Costs' 'self Represented Litigant' 'costs Assessment' 'overriding Purpose' 'summary Dismissal']
['costs' 'civil Procedure'] ['gross Sum Costs Orders' 'indemnity Costs' 'self Represented Litigant' 'costs Assessment' 'overriding Purpose' 'summary Dismissal']

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 for a Gross Sum Costs Order Under S 98(4)(c) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (nsw) Following Summary Dismissal of the Plaintiff's Proceedings / On the Papers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Court should determine the defendant's gross sum costs application on the papers without a further hearing." "Whether time should be extended for the plaintiff to file evidence and submissions in response to the defendant's costs application." 'Whether it was appropriate to exercise the discretion under s 98(4)(c) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) to make a gross sum costs order.' 'What gross sum should fairly and reasonably be ordered for the costs of the proceedings and the notice of motion filed 17 November 2023.']

Ratio Decidendi

A gross sum costs order was warranted because it would avoid delay, cost and aggravation of assessment, there was doubt about the plaintiff's capacity to meet costs, and the plaintiff's conduct unnecessarily and substantially increased the defendant's costs. The defendant's evidence was accurate and reliable enough to permit a fair broad-brush assessment. The plaintiff's request for a six-month extension was refused because it was unexplained, unsupported by his asserted other litigation, based on notices of motion filed after dismissal and contrary to Campbell J's direction, and inconsistent with the just, quick and cheap resolution of the remaining costs issue. After discounting...

Court Disposition

Application granted; the plaintiff was ordered to pay the defendant's costs of the proceedings and of the notice of motion filed 17 November 2023 in a gross sum.

Orders

  • ["Order, pursuant to s 98(4)(c) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), the plaintiff pay the defendant's costs of the proceedings, and of the notice of motion filed 17 November 2023, in the gross sum of $213,000.00."]