Ghosh v Miller (No. 4) [2015] NSWDC 206

Ghosh v Miller (No. 4) [2015] NSWDC 206

The application was dismissed because there were no costs orders in favour of the plaintiff for the relevant occasions (except one), the claimed expenses were largely not recoverable by a litigant in person, and the plaintiff failed to provide sufficiently accurate or reliable evidence of any recoverable out-of-pocket disbursements. Thus, there was no basis for a gross sum costs order.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 September 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Gross Sum Costs Order Prior to Trial
Outcome
Plaintiff's application for gross sum costs order dismissed; plaintiff to pay defendants’ costs of and concerning this motion.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'gross Sum Costs Order' 'litigant in Person Costs' 'defamation' 'interlocutory Applications']
['civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'gross Sum Costs Order' 'litigant in Person Costs' 'defamation' 'interlocutory Applications']

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

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Gross Sum Costs Order Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff is entitled to gross sum costs orders for interlocutory hearings where only one previous costs order had been made in her favour' 'Whether a self-represented litigant can claim the various costs and disbursements asserted, including travel, photocopying, loss of income, and fees paid to counsel' 'Whether the court should make a gross sum costs order assessable forthwith, on an indemnity basis, or at all, in circumstances where little or no costs were otherwise recoverable']

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because there were no costs orders in favour of the plaintiff for the relevant occasions (except one), the claimed expenses were largely not recoverable by a litigant in person, and the plaintiff failed to provide sufficiently accurate or reliable evidence of any recoverable out-of-pocket disbursements. Thus, there was no basis for a gross sum costs order.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's application for gross sum costs order dismissed; plaintiff to pay defendants’ costs of and concerning this motion.

Orders

  • ["Plaintiff's application for gross sum costs order pursuant s 98 Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) dismissed." "Plaintiff to pay defendants' costs of and concerning this motion." 'Any further application for costs for each of the 10 occasions identified by the plaintiff in her notice of motion is to be left to the...