Benjamin & Khoury Pty Ltd v Gabriel Rahme [2021] NSWSC 1302

Benjamin & Khoury Pty Ltd v Gabriel Rahme [2021] NSWSC 1302

The judgment was correctly entered against Mr Rahme for costs; there was no irregularity or lack of good faith in its entry. The Court of Appeal set aside costs agreements and judgment only in relation to Mrs Rahme, not Mr Rahme. Mr Rahme did not exercise his right of review within the statutory period, and supervening events or subsequent appellate orders did not alter his liability. The application to set aside the judgment is dismissed in the exercise of the Court's discretion.

Parties
Plaintiff: Benjamin & Khoury Pty Ltd; First Defendant: Gabriel Rahme; Second Defendant: Dana Rahme
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Motion to Set Aside Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs Assessment, Setting Aside Judgment, Inherent Jurisdiction, Res Judicata, Fiduciary Duties, Costs Agreements
Civil Procedure Costs Assessment Setting Aside Judgment Inherent Jurisdiction Res Judicata Fiduciary Duties Costs Agreements

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benjamin & Khoury Pty Ltd

Plaintiff

Gabriel Rahme

First Defendant

Dana Rahme

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Motion to Set Aside Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the deemed judgment entered on 5 September 2014 should be set aside against the first defendant
  2. 2 Whether any irregularity or lack of good faith attended the entry of judgment within the review period for the costs assessment
  3. 3 Effect of Court of Appeal decisions and orders as 'supervening events' on enforceability of the judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The judgment was correctly entered against Mr Rahme for costs; there was no irregularity or lack of good faith in its entry. The Court of Appeal set aside costs agreements and judgment only in relation to Mrs Rahme, not Mr Rahme. Mr Rahme did not exercise his right of review within the statutory period, and supervening events or subsequent appellate orders did not alter his liability. The application to set aside the judgment is dismissed in the exercise of the Court's discretion.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The first defendant's amended notice of motion filed 5 August 2021 is dismissed.
  • The first defendant is to pay the plaintiff's costs on an ordinary basis, if the plaintiff does not seek an alternative order from the Court within 7 days. If the plaintiff does seek an alternative order I will give directions for the filing of written submissions.