Anthony Simon Bell v Rittal Pty Limited [2013] NSWSC 398
Although the plaintiff had no extant set-off and the application arose unusually from his contractual assumption of Rittal's obligation to pay Johnson & Johnson Pacific Pty Ltd's costs of the cross-claim, the court's power to control its own processes could be exercised in the interests of justice. The fresh proceedings raised substantially the same case as the cross-claim, creating significant commonality of costs; the position was analogous to the plaintiff having joined Johnson & Johnson Pacific Pty Ltd in the original proceedings; and immediate payment would cause the plaintiff, a man of limited means, considerable hardship. Justice was served by deferring payment of Johnson & Johnson...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 23 April 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Common Law; Interlocutory Application in Personal Injury Proceedings / Plaintiff's Notice of Motion Seeking Orders Disposing of Original Proceedings, Including Contested Stay of Payment of Costs of Cross Claim Until Completion of Fresh Proceedings Against Johnson & Johnson Pacific Pty Ltd
- Outcome
- Orders made, including stay of payment of costs of second cross-claim until completion of the JJP proceedings.
- Legal Topics
- ['stay of Enforcement of Costs Order' 'discontinuance of Cross Claim' 'set Off of Costs Orders' "court's Control of Its Own Processes" 'hardship and Prejudice in Costs Enforcement']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Common Law; Interlocutory Application in Personal Injury Proceedings / Plaintiff's Notice of Motion Seeking Orders Disposing of Original Proceedings, Including Contested Stay of Payment of Costs of Cross Claim Until Completion of Fresh Proceedings Against Johnson & Johnson Pacific Pty Ltd
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether payment of Johnson & Johnson Pacific Pty Ltd's costs of Rittal's cross-claim should be stayed until completion of the plaintiff's fresh proceedings against Johnson & Johnson Pacific Pty Ltd." "Whether the court's power to control its own processes and stay enforcement of costs orders could be exercised where the plaintiff had no extant set-off but had assumed by agreement Rittal's liability for the cross-claim costs." "Whether commonality between the costs of the discontinued cross-claim and the fresh proceedings, and the plaintiff's limited means, justified deferring payment."]
Ratio Decidendi
Although the plaintiff had no extant set-off and the application arose unusually from his contractual assumption of Rittal's obligation to pay Johnson & Johnson Pacific Pty Ltd's costs of the cross-claim, the court's power to control its own processes could be exercised in the interests of justice. The fresh proceedings raised substantially the same case as the cross-claim, creating significant commonality of costs; the position was analogous to the plaintiff having joined Johnson & Johnson Pacific Pty Ltd in the original proceedings; and immediate payment would cause the plaintiff, a man of limited means, considerable hardship. Justice was served by deferring payment of Johnson & Johnson...
Court Disposition
Orders made, including stay of payment of costs of second cross-claim until completion of the JJP proceedings.
Orders
- ['Judgment for Rittal.' "Rittal's cross-claim against Johnson & Johnson Pacific Pty Ltd is discontinued." "Rittal is to pay Johnson & Johnson Pacific Pty Ltd's costs of the cross-claim." "The plaintiff is to pay Rittal's costs, but it is noted that the effect of an agreement between the plaintiff and Rittal is that...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment