Drama Unit Pty Ltd v Fearndale Holdings Pty Ltd (Administrator Appointed) & Anor [2019] NSWSC 424

Drama Unit Pty Ltd v Fearndale Holdings Pty Ltd (Administrator Appointed) & Anor [2019] NSWSC 424

No order as to costs as between the Plaintiff and First Defendant is appropriate because the Plaintiff succeeded on only one limited ground, pursued multiple unsuccessful claims, put the First Defendant to unnecessary cost, and its limited success did not warrant a costs order. The Second Defendant's costs should be costs in the voluntary administration as they were properly incurred in that capacity.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Costs Determination Following Substantive Judgment / Post Judgment (costs Arguments and Orders)
Outcome
No order as to costs between Plaintiff and First Defendant; Second Defendant's costs to be costs in administration.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'party/party Costs' 'exceptions to Costs Following the Event' 'lease Disputes' 'administration of Companies']
['equity' 'corporations'] ['costs' 'party/party Costs' 'exceptions to Costs Following the Event' 'lease Disputes' 'administration of Companies']

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

Costs Determination Following Substantive Judgment / Post Judgment (costs Arguments and Orders)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Should an order for costs be made as between the Plaintiff and First Defendant in circumstances of partial and limited success?' "Should the Second Defendant's costs be paid out of the administration of the First Defendant?"]

Ratio Decidendi

No order as to costs as between the Plaintiff and First Defendant is appropriate because the Plaintiff succeeded on only one limited ground, pursued multiple unsuccessful claims, put the First Defendant to unnecessary cost, and its limited success did not warrant a costs order. The Second Defendant's costs should be costs in the voluntary administration as they were properly incurred in that capacity.

Court Disposition

No order as to costs between Plaintiff and First Defendant; Second Defendant's costs to be costs in administration.

Orders

  • ['No order as to costs of the proceedings as between Drama Unit Pty Ltd and Fearndale Holdings Pty Ltd (Administrator Appointed).' "Timothy Cook's costs of the proceedings be costs in the voluntary administration of Fearndale Holdings Pty Ltd (Administrator Appointed)."]