Curnow Consulting Pty Limited v JPD Media and Design Pty Ltd t/a Durie Design (No. 3) [2018] NSWSC 827

Curnow Consulting Pty Limited v JPD Media and Design Pty Ltd t/a Durie Design (No. 3) [2018] NSWSC 827

Interest is to be awarded for the full period up to judgment under Civil Procedure Act 2005, s 100, as delays in the proceedings were not sufficient to justify reducing interest; costs should be awarded mostly in favour of the plaintiff against the first defendant, with an exception for costs associated with the hearing on 12 December 2017, due to relative success by the defendant on certain issues, with no discount for Calderbank offers as it was reasonable for the plaintiff to reject them given incomplete information.

Parties
Plaintiff: Curnow Consulting Pty Limited; First Defendant: JPD Media & Design Pty Limited trading as Durie Design; Second Defendant: Jamie Paul Durie
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Equity / Post Judgment, Costs and Interest Determination
Outcome
Plaintiff awarded interest from October 2013 up to judgment; plaintiff awarded costs except for costs associated with the hearing on 12 December 2017; no costs order between plaintiff and second defendant; orders reserved pending outcome of administration.
Legal Topics
Pre Judgment Interest, Costs, Civil Procedure, Contract Termination, Calderbank Offer
Equity Costs Pre Judgment Interest Civil Procedure Contract Termination Calderbank Offer

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 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Curnow Consulting Pty Limited

Plaintiff

JPD Media & Design Pty Limited trading as Durie Design

First Defendant

Jamie Paul Durie

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Equity / Post Judgment, Costs and Interest Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interest up to judgment should run during a period when proceedings were stayed as a result of non-payment by the plaintiff of a costs order
  2. 2 Whether interest should be limited to the period after service of expert evidence expanding the plaintiff’s claim
  3. 3 Whether an order for costs should be made in favour of the second defendant

Ratio Decidendi

Interest is to be awarded for the full period up to judgment under Civil Procedure Act 2005, s 100, as delays in the proceedings were not sufficient to justify reducing interest; costs should be awarded mostly in favour of the plaintiff against the first defendant, with an exception for costs associated with the hearing on 12 December 2017, due to relative success by the defendant on certain issues, with no discount for Calderbank offers as it was reasonable for the plaintiff to reject them given incomplete information.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff awarded interest from October 2013 up to judgment; plaintiff awarded costs except for costs associated with the hearing on 12 December 2017; no costs order between plaintiff and second defendant; orders reserved pending outcome of administration.

Orders

  • First defendant to pay the plaintiff interest under Civil Procedure Act 2005, s 100 up to the date of judgment (8 March 2018), on the judgment sum of $563,049.02.
  • First defendant to pay plaintiff's costs of the proceedings on the ordinary basis, except for costs associated with hearing on 12 December 2017, which are to be paid by the plaintiff.