Dee-Tech Pty Limited & Anor v Neddam Holdings Pty Limited (No. 2) [2012] NSWSC 517
The court found that Dee-Tech's contractual obligation to pay outgoings accrued within 30 days from receipt of invoice, and that interest was due in accordance with the lease. The costs orders reflected the partial success and conduct of both parties: Dee-Tech was ordered to pay two-thirds of Neddam Holdings' costs...
Source-derived case information.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 18 May 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Equity (landlord and Tenant, Costs) / Post Trial Judgment on Orders and Costs
- Outcome
- Orders granted refer to paras [63] and [82]: relief against forfeiture conditional on payment and insurance; costs apportioned between parties; indemnity costs on a motion.
- Legal Topics
- ['leases—payment of Outgoings' 'leases—relief Against Forfeiture' 'costs—exceptions to General Rule' 'costs—multiple Issues and Partial Success' 'costs—calderbank Offers and Indemnity Basis']
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Civil Equity (landlord and Tenant, Costs) / Post Trial Judgment on Orders and Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 ['When contribution to outgoings became due under the lease where no express term existed' 'Whether interest is payable by lessee for overdue contributions to outgoings' 'Whether relief against forfeiture should be conditional on compliance with previous court orders, including insurance requirements' 'On what basis costs should be awarded considering multiple issues, partial success, and offers of compromise' 'Whether indemnity costs are allowable under lease or by Calderbank offer']
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that Dee-Tech's contractual obligation to pay outgoings accrued within 30 days from receipt of invoice, and that interest was due in accordance with the lease. The costs orders reflected the partial success and conduct of both parties: Dee-Tech was ordered to pay two-thirds of Neddam Holdings' costs of the account, while Neddam Holdings was ordered to pay half of Dee-Tech’s costs in the action for relief against forfeiture, reflecting the parties' respective successes and failures on discrete issues. Relief against forfeiture was made conditional upon Dee-Tech paying the sums due and providing proof of insurance, but not on payment of costs. Indemnity costs were declined...
Court Disposition
Orders granted refer to paras [63] and [82]: relief against forfeiture conditional on payment and insurance; costs apportioned between parties; indemnity costs on a motion.
Orders
- ['Dee-Tech to pay Neddam Holdings $51,912.09 for outgoings and interest, subject to set-off of $4,000 plus interest (from prior judgment)' "Dee-Tech to pay two-thirds of Neddam Holdings' costs of the account on an ordinary basis" 'All sums in escrow account to be paid to Neddam Holdings' 'Other claims of both...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment