Arambewela v Castle Projects Pty Ltd [2018] NSWCATAP 14

Arambewela v Castle Projects Pty Ltd [2018] NSWCATAP 14

The discretion not to order costs against the discontinuing party (the Homeowners) was exercised for three key reasons: (1) the Builder's failure to comply with consent orders (non-payment), which made the appeal's utility doubtful for the appellants; (2) withdrawal occurred early in the appeal before substantive steps or wasted costs; and (3) the appeal was not hopeless or vexatious.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Costs Determination After Discontinuance of Appeal
Outcome
Application for costs refused; each party to pay own costs.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'discontinuance' 'tribunal Procedure']
['civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'discontinuance' 'tribunal Procedure']

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

Appeal / Costs Determination After Discontinuance of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the discontinuing party should pay the costs of a discontinued appeal before NCAT']

Ratio Decidendi

The discretion not to order costs against the discontinuing party (the Homeowners) was exercised for three key reasons: (1) the Builder's failure to comply with consent orders (non-payment), which made the appeal's utility doubtful for the appellants; (2) withdrawal occurred early in the appeal before substantive steps or wasted costs; and (3) the appeal was not hopeless or vexatious.

Court Disposition

Application for costs refused; each party to pay own costs.

Orders

  • ['The application for costs is refused.' 'Each party is to pay their own costs.']