Break Fast Investments Pty Ltd v Perikles Giannopoulos (also known as Perry Giannopoulos) & Anor (No 7) [2012] NSWSC 495

Break Fast Investments Pty Ltd v Perikles Giannopoulos (also known as Perry Giannopoulos) & Anor (No 7) [2012] NSWSC 495

Given the plaintiff succeeded only on unjust enrichment against Mr Giannopoulos, failed against Ms Faraone and on several claims, and the manner those claims added to cost/complexity, the order for costs was apportioned: Mr Giannopoulos should pay 75% of one-half of the plaintiff's costs; Ms Faraone should recover indemnity costs for defending unsupported allegations; Citigroup should recover its costs from Break Fast (except for hearing on 15 February 2012) but pay the other defendants' costs of the application concerning its own costs. No reopening of the subrogation question was warranted, as further argument would not affect the result.

Parties
Plaintiff: Break Fast Investments Pty Ltd; First Defendant: Perikles Giannopoulos (also known as Perry Giannopoulos); Second Defendant: Sandra Faraone; Third Defendant: Citigroup Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Costs/equity Proceedings / Post Judgment; Determination of Relief and Costs
Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiff against First Defendant in $317,000; Judgment for Second Defendant against Plaintiff; various orders as to costs and interest.
Legal Topics
Costs, Apportionment, Indemnity Costs, Unjust Enrichment, Subrogation
Equity Civil Procedure Costs Apportionment Indemnity Costs Unjust Enrichment Subrogation

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 2 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Break Fast Investments Pty Ltd

Plaintiff

Perikles Giannopoulos (also known as Perry Giannopoulos)

First Defendant

Sandra Faraone

Second Defendant

Citigroup Pty Ltd

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs/equity Proceedings / Post Judgment; Determination of Relief and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper apportionment of costs after mixed results in multi-defendant proceedings
  2. 2 Whether indemnity costs should be ordered against the unsuccessful plaintiff for allegations made against Second Defendant
  3. 3 Assessment of entitlement to interest on judgment sum for unjust enrichment

Ratio Decidendi

Given the plaintiff succeeded only on unjust enrichment against Mr Giannopoulos, failed against Ms Faraone and on several claims, and the manner those claims added to cost/complexity, the order for costs was apportioned: Mr Giannopoulos should pay 75% of one-half of the plaintiff's costs; Ms Faraone should recover indemnity costs for defending unsupported allegations; Citigroup should recover its costs from Break Fast (except for hearing on 15 February 2012) but pay the other defendants' costs of the application concerning its own costs. No reopening of the subrogation question was warranted, as further argument would not affect the result.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Plaintiff against First Defendant in $317,000; Judgment for Second Defendant against Plaintiff; various orders as to costs and interest.

Orders

  • Judgment for Plaintiff against the First Defendant in the sum of $317,000.
  • Judgment for the Second Defendant against the Plaintiff.