Buses + 4WD Hire Pty Limited v Oz Snow Adventures Pty Limited [2016] NSWSC 1149

Buses + 4WD Hire Pty Limited v Oz Snow Adventures Pty Limited [2016] NSWSC 1149

The Court held that the insurer, Zurich, should pay the defendants' costs of the motion as ordered previously, but Buses' application for Zurich to pay its own costs as cross-defendant was rejected. Buses' interests in the motion were distinct and not indemnified by Zurich, so each party was to bear its own costs for the motion in respect of the insurer and the insured plaintiff.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 August 2016
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Post Motion Determination
Outcome
costs orders made
Legal Topics
['costs' 'insurance' 'separate Legal Representation']

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

Costs Application / Post Motion Determination

  1. 1 ["Who should bear the costs of the notice of motion, particularly where the insured plaintiff's interests diverge from those of the insurer." "Whether Zurich Australia Insurance Limited, as insurer, should pay both the defendants' costs and the insured plaintiff's costs of the motion."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the insurer, Zurich, should pay the defendants' costs of the motion as ordered previously, but Buses' application for Zurich to pay its own costs as cross-defendant was rejected. Buses' interests in the motion were distinct and not indemnified by Zurich, so each party was to bear its own costs for the motion in respect of the insurer and the insured plaintiff.

Court Disposition

costs orders made

Orders

  • ["The plaintiffs are to pay the defendants' costs of the motion, intended to be paid by the plaintiffs' insurer, Zurich Australia Insurance Limited." 'No order as to the costs of the plaintiff or the respective cross-defendants; each is to bear their own costs of the motion.']