O'Sullivan v Morton [1911] HCA 27

As the question of costs is discretionary, the amount in dispute is not substantial, and the order of the Full Court is manifestly just, leave to appeal should be refused.

Parties: Plaintiff: Edward Francis O'Sullivan; Defendant: David Murray Morton
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 15 June 1911
Procedural Posture: Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal From Full Court Decision as to Costs
Outcome: special leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics: Costs, Appeals, Special Leave, Trial by Jury, Apportionment of Costs

Civil Procedure Costs Appeals Special Leave Trial by Jury Apportionment of Costs

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 4 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 3

Parties

Edward Francis O'Sullivan

Plaintiff

David Murray Morton

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal From Full Court Decision as to Costs

Legal Issues

1 Whether special leave to appeal as to costs should be granted
2 Proper apportionment and taxation of costs where plaintiff succeeds on some issues and defendant on others

Ratio Decidendi

As the question of costs is discretionary, the amount in dispute is not substantial, and the order of the Full Court is manifestly just, leave to appeal should be refused.

Court Disposition

special leave to appeal refused

Orders

Special leave to appeal refused