Gunther v Taylor [2008] NSWLEC 127

Gunther v Taylor [2008] NSWLEC 127

Applicants were entitled to costs because the orders of the Court were substantially in the terms claimed by them and there was no disentitling conduct; the respondents surrendered to the orders sought by applicants.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Class 4 Application (and Reassignment to Class 3 for Encroachment) / Post Settlement, Costs Determination
Outcome
Costs awarded to applicants in fixed sum.
Legal Topics
['encroachment' 'costs in Litigation' 'neighbour Disputes' 'building Approvals' 'surveying Rights']
['property Law' 'building and Construction Law'] ['encroachment' 'costs in Litigation' 'neighbour Disputes' 'building Approvals' 'surveying Rights']

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 4 Application (and Reassignment to Class 3 for Encroachment) / Post Settlement, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether costs should be awarded to applicants after settlement' "Whether applicants' conduct disentitles them to costs" 'Whether certain items of claimed costs are allowable']

Ratio Decidendi

Applicants were entitled to costs because the orders of the Court were substantially in the terms claimed by them and there was no disentitling conduct; the respondents surrendered to the orders sought by applicants.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to applicants in fixed sum.

Orders

  • ["Respondents pay applicants' costs of the proceedings and the costs application, fixed at $11,000."]