Baulkham Hills Shire Council v Stankovic (No 5) [2008] NSWLEC 327
There is no irregularity in the entry of the March 2005 costs order, and the strict time bar for challenging the order under r 36.16 has not been complied with. No exceptional circumstances exist to justify the Court exercising its discretion to set aside the final costs order.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 19 December 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Notice of Motion to Set Aside Costs Order / Judgment on Notice of Motion
- Outcome
- Notice of Motion dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['setting Aside Costs Orders' 'irregularity Under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules' "court's Discretion in Final Orders" 'time Bar for Motions']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion to Set Aside Costs Order / Judgment on Notice of Motion
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether Court should set aside 2005 costs order pursuant to Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005' 'Whether order made irregularly under r 36.15' 'Operation of time bar in r 36.16' 'Whether Court should exercise discretion to set aside or stay costs order']
Ratio Decidendi
There is no irregularity in the entry of the March 2005 costs order, and the strict time bar for challenging the order under r 36.16 has not been complied with. No exceptional circumstances exist to justify the Court exercising its discretion to set aside the final costs order.
Court Disposition
Notice of Motion dismissed
Orders
- ["The Respondent's Notice of Motion dated 25 November 2008 is dismissed." "The Respondent is to pay the Applicant's costs of the Notice of Motion dated 25 November 2008 as agreed or assessed on or by 19 December 2010."]
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