JONES V. SKYRING

JONES V. SKYRING

There is no persuasive reason offered by Mr Skyring to depart from the ordinary rule that the unsuccessful respondent pays the applicant's costs.

Parties
Respondent: Mr Skyring; Applicant: applicant
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 November 1992
Procedural Posture
Costs Determination Following Previous Order
Outcome
Costs awarded against the respondent.
Legal Topics
Costs, Discretion of Court, Successful Party Entitlement
Costs Discretion of Court Successful Party Entitlement

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Skyring

Respondent

applicant

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Costs Determination Following Previous Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the unsuccessful respondent should pay the applicant's costs of the notice of motion

Ratio Decidendi

There is no persuasive reason offered by Mr Skyring to depart from the ordinary rule that the unsuccessful respondent pays the applicant's costs.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded against the respondent.

Orders

  • Mr Skyring must pay the applicant's costs of the notice of motion.