Coopes Pty Limited v Claitrack Pty Limited (No 2) [2007] NSWADT 255

Coopes Pty Limited v Claitrack Pty Limited (No 2) [2007] NSWADT 255

The applicant's insistence on a very short notice for the respondent to vacate, especially given the lack of justification and the Australia Day public holiday, constituted special circumstances justifying a departure from the usual order as to costs. The Tribunal also considered the apportionment of costs in light of the conduct of proceedings and the success of both parties.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Claim for Payment of Money / Costs Decision After Primary Proceedings
Outcome
Costs apportioned between the parties based on special circumstances and conduct.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'special Circumstances' 'adjournment' 'lockout' 'apportionment of Costs']
['retail Leases'] ['costs' 'special Circumstances' 'adjournment' 'lockout' 'apportionment of 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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Claim for Payment of Money / Costs Decision After Primary Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether special circumstances exist justifying a departure from the usual order as to costs under the Retail Leases Act 1994' "Whether the applicant's conduct in enforcing a lockout amounted to special circumstances" 'Effect of failed mediation and unaccepted settlement offer on costs']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's insistence on a very short notice for the respondent to vacate, especially given the lack of justification and the Australia Day public holiday, constituted special circumstances justifying a departure from the usual order as to costs. The Tribunal also considered the apportionment of costs in light of the conduct of proceedings and the success of both parties.

Court Disposition

Costs apportioned between the parties based on special circumstances and conduct.

Orders

  • ["Respondent to pay Applicant's costs thrown away by the adjournment of 30 October." 'Applicant to pay 55% of the balance of the Respondent’s costs of claim and cross claim, including the costs of submissions as to costs, all on a party/party basis.']