Akdogan v The Owners - Strata Plan No 55665 [2025] NSWCATAP 39

Akdogan v The Owners - Strata Plan No 55665 [2025] NSWCATAP 39

The costs application of the respondent was dismissed because, although special circumstances existed (the applicants had no standing), the discretion to award costs was not exercised as the applicants did not act unreasonably, were self-represented, there was no significant quantum of costs, the respondent did not...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Ayten Akdogan; Appellant: Khaled Mourad; Appellant: Jillian Dolby; Appellant: Bronwyn Whale; Appellant: Albert Ayoub; Appellant: Ameen Ayoub; Respondent: The Owners - Strata Plan No 55665
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Costs Application After Withdrawal of Appeal
Outcome
Costs application dismissed; each party to pay their own costs of the appeal.
Legal Topics
Costs Applications, Appeal Procedure, Standing of Parties, Strata Management
Costs Strata Law Costs Applications Appeal Procedure Standing of Parties Strata Management

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 5 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ayten Akdogan

Appellant

Khaled Mourad

Appellant

Jillian Dolby

Appellant

Bronwyn Whale

Appellant

Albert Ayoub

Appellant

Ameen Ayoub

Appellant

The Owners - Strata Plan No 55665

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Costs Application After Withdrawal of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal should dispense with a hearing for the respondent's costs application
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal has power to make a costs order against the applicants (non-parties)
  3. 3 Whether there are special circumstances warranting an award of costs in favour of the respondent

Ratio Decidendi

The costs application of the respondent was dismissed because, although special circumstances existed (the applicants had no standing), the discretion to award costs was not exercised as the applicants did not act unreasonably, were self-represented, there was no significant quantum of costs, the respondent did not follow procedural requirements regarding representation and notice, and an award of costs should not be used as punishment or deterrence.

Court Disposition

Costs application dismissed; each party to pay their own costs of the appeal.

Orders

  • A hearing of the costs application of the respondent is dispensed with.
  • The costs application of the respondent is dismissed.