McVicar v Hanson Construction Materials Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 175

McVicar v Hanson Construction Materials Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 175

The applicant failed to provide any adequate explanation for her delay in seeking an extension of time; prejudice would accrue to Hanson by reopening the judgment. No clear injustice was demonstrated in the costs order or in the Local Court's exercise of discretion. Barko LCM duly considered proportionality, the applicant's conduct, and the complexity arising from unmeritorious defences. The Practice Note is merely a guideline, not a binding limitation. There was no basis for extension of time, for granting leave to appeal, nor for disturbing the costs order.

Parties
Plaintiff: Donna-Maree McVicar; Defendant: Hanson Construction Materials Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Ex Tempore Judgment on Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal (costs Order)
Outcome
Summons dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs, Leave to Appeal, Extension of Time, Practice Notes, Proportionality of Costs, Discretionary Costs Orders
Civil Procedure Costs Leave to Appeal Extension of Time Practice Notes Proportionality of Costs Discretionary Costs Orders

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Donna-Maree McVicar

Plaintiff

Hanson Construction Materials Pty Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Ex Tempore Judgment on Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal (costs Order)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal from a Local Court costs order should be granted
  2. 2 Whether there was sufficient reason for an extension of time to appeal
  3. 3 Whether the Local Court erred in its exercise of discretion regarding the quantum and basis of costs

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide any adequate explanation for her delay in seeking an extension of time; prejudice would accrue to Hanson by reopening the judgment. No clear injustice was demonstrated in the costs order or in the Local Court's exercise of discretion. Barko LCM duly considered proportionality, the applicant's conduct, and the complexity arising from unmeritorious defences. The Practice Note is merely a guideline, not a binding limitation. There was no basis for extension of time, for granting leave to appeal, nor for disturbing the costs order.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed

Orders

  • Summons dismissed
  • Plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs