James v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [2017] NSWCA 84

James v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [2017] NSWCA 84

Extension of time to seek leave to appeal was refused because leave to appeal would itself have been refused; the applicant did not demonstrate any error of legal principle or fact warranting appellate intervention in the discretionary costs order; the evidence before the primary judge was sufficient for an informed assessment.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Extension of time refused; leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'gross Sum Costs Order' 'discretionary Power' 'derivative Proceedings']
['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'gross Sum Costs Order' 'discretionary Power' 'derivative Proceedings']

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 / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether applicant should be granted an extension of time to seek leave to appeal' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted from a judgment as to costs alone under Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(c)' 'Whether the judge erred in making a gross sum costs order under Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) s 98(4)(c)' 'Whether there was insufficient evidence before the primary judge for an informed costs assessment' 'Whether alleged factual errors warrant appellate intervention']

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time to seek leave to appeal was refused because leave to appeal would itself have been refused; the applicant did not demonstrate any error of legal principle or fact warranting appellate intervention in the discretionary costs order; the evidence before the primary judge was sufficient for an informed assessment.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused; leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • ['Refuse the applicant an extension of time within which to seek leave to appeal from the judgment of Ball J of 23 June 2016.' "Order that the applicant pay the respondents' costs in this Court."]