Alicja Polbratek v Annross Partners Pty Limited trading as Centro Real Estate [2016] NSWSC 385

The stakeholder (first defendant) did not act unreasonably in refusing to release deposited funds to the plaintiff absent consent from the purchaser or court order. The stakeholder's position was consistent with its legal obligations and industry protocol. Accordingly, the plaintiff, not having clearly prevailed against the stakeholder, should pay the first defendant’s costs on the usual basis.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 08 April 2016
Procedural Posture: Civil / Costs Determination After Interim Orders
Outcome: Plaintiff to pay the first defendant's costs on the usual basis.
Legal Topics: ['costs' 'stakeholder Release of Deposit' 'termination of Contract for Sale of Land']

['equity' 'conveyancing'] ['costs' 'stakeholder Release of Deposit' 'termination of Contract for Sale of Land']

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

Procedural Posture

Civil / Costs Determination After Interim Orders

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether the vendor (plaintiff) is entitled to costs against the stakeholder (first defendant) following orders for release of deposit funds' 'Whether the stakeholder acted unreasonably in refusing to release deposit funds to the vendor absent consent from purchaser or court order' 'Whether the stakeholder was obliged to release funds to the vendor upon termination of contract']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Plaintiff to pay the first defendant's costs on the usual basis.

Orders

["The Court orders that the plaintiff pay the first defendant's costs of the proceedings on the usual basis."]