Chung-Yi Pty Ltd v Chang [2020] NSWSC 264

Chung-Yi Pty Ltd v Chang [2020] NSWSC 264

Chung-Yi Pty Ltd was entitled to indemnity costs for the Freezing Order Motion and Variation Motion because Mr Chang delayed satisfying a substantial judgment and resisted enforcement, ultimately capitulating by paying the protected sum into court. The s 37A Proceedings and Notice to Produce Motion were not clearly connected or likely to succeed, thus no costs order was made for them.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Commercial List Equity / Costs Determination Following Satisfaction of Judgment/order and Resolution of Interlocutory Applications
Outcome
Costs order largely in favour of plaintiff on an indemnity basis for select motions; no order as to costs for notice to produce and s 37A proceedings; leave granted for gross sum costs notice.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'freezing Orders' 'conveyancing Act S 37 a Proceedings' 'indemnity Costs']
['civil Procedure' 'equity'] ['costs' 'freezing Orders' 'conveyancing Act S 37 a Proceedings' 'indemnity Costs']

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

Commercial List Equity / Costs Determination Following Satisfaction of Judgment/order and Resolution of Interlocutory Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff should have its costs of interlocutory applications (Freezing Order Motion, Variation Motion, Notice to Produce Motion, s 37A Proceedings) after satisfaction of judgment' 'Whether costs should be awarded on an indemnity basis']

Ratio Decidendi

Chung-Yi Pty Ltd was entitled to indemnity costs for the Freezing Order Motion and Variation Motion because Mr Chang delayed satisfying a substantial judgment and resisted enforcement, ultimately capitulating by paying the protected sum into court. The s 37A Proceedings and Notice to Produce Motion were not clearly connected or likely to succeed, thus no costs order was made for them.

Court Disposition

Costs order largely in favour of plaintiff on an indemnity basis for select motions; no order as to costs for notice to produce and s 37A proceedings; leave granted for gross sum costs notice.

Orders

  • ["The first defendant's notice of motion filed on 15 November 2019 is dismissed." "The first defendant's notice of motion filed on 5 December 2019 is dismissed." "The first defendant must pay the first plaintiff's costs of the Freezing Order Motion (filed 26 September 2019) and the Variation Motion (filed 15...