Kontaineroo Pty Ltd v Slaveski [2024] NSWCATAP 264

Kontaineroo Pty Ltd v Slaveski [2024] NSWCATAP 264

The Tribunal was not satisfied there were special circumstances warranting a costs order under s 60(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) because the respondents (Slaveski) failed to demonstrate unreasonable prolongation, misconceived proceedings, or other relevant factors, and the mere withdrawal of the appeal did not justify a costs order. Therefore, each party is to bear their own costs of the appeal.

Parties
First Appellant: Kontaineroo Pty Ltd; Second Appellant: Kearan McMenamin; Respondent: Drage Slaveski; Respondent: Susie Slaveski
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal From Consumer and Commercial Division Decision / Post Appeal, Determination of Costs Application
Outcome
Costs application dismissed. Each party to pay own costs of the appeal.
Legal Topics
Costs, Appeals, Withdrawal of Proceedings
Civil Procedure Costs Appeals Withdrawal of 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 5 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kontaineroo Pty Ltd

First Appellant

Kearan McMenamin

Second Appellant

Drage Slaveski

Respondent

Susie Slaveski

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Internal Appeal From Consumer and Commercial Division Decision / Post Appeal, Determination of Costs Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a hearing of the costs application should be dispensed with
  2. 2 Whether there are special circumstances warranting an award of costs in favour of the respondents (Drage and Susie Slaveski) upon withdrawal of the appellants' appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was not satisfied there were special circumstances warranting a costs order under s 60(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) because the respondents (Slaveski) failed to demonstrate unreasonable prolongation, misconceived proceedings, or other relevant factors, and the mere withdrawal of the appeal did not justify a costs order. Therefore, each party is to bear their own costs of the appeal.

Court Disposition

Costs application dismissed. Each party to pay own costs of the appeal.

Orders

  • A hearing of the costs application of the respondents is dispensed with.
  • The costs application of the respondents is dismissed.