Expandamesh Pty Ltd v Sydney Metro (No 4) [2023] NSWLEC 105

Expandamesh Pty Ltd v Sydney Metro (No 4) [2023] NSWLEC 105

The appropriate order for costs is that the Respondent (Sydney Metro) pay the Applicant's (Expandamesh's) costs of the first instance hearing, except as already covered by earlier costs orders, and also pay the Applicant's costs of these costs considerations, because the Applicant pursued a novel and arguable point reasonably, the settlement offers did not amount to genuine compromise, and in compulsory acquisition cases, dispossessed owners acting reasonably should not be discouraged from seeking judicial determination by adverse costs orders.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 October 2023
Procedural Posture
Compulsory Acquisition Compensation Claim (class 3) / Determination of Costs at First Instance Following Remittal From the Court of Appeal
Outcome
Respondent to pay the Applicant's costs of the first instance hearing (with exceptions for costs subject to earlier specific orders) and costs of consideration of costs issues.
Legal Topics
['compulsory Acquisition' 'costs' 'statutory Construction' 'calderbank Offers']
['compensation Law' 'land Acquisition' 'administrative Law'] ['compulsory Acquisition' 'costs' 'statutory Construction' 'calderbank Offers']

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

Compulsory Acquisition Compensation Claim (class 3) / Determination of Costs at First Instance Following Remittal From the Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Applicant's claim for compensation following compulsory acquisition of a substratum for railway tunnels is barred by cl 2(1)(a) of Sch 6B of the Transport Administration Act 1988; if so, the appropriate costs order at first instance given the history of the proceedings and offers made"]

Ratio Decidendi

The appropriate order for costs is that the Respondent (Sydney Metro) pay the Applicant's (Expandamesh's) costs of the first instance hearing, except as already covered by earlier costs orders, and also pay the Applicant's costs of these costs considerations, because the Applicant pursued a novel and arguable point reasonably, the settlement offers did not amount to genuine compromise, and in compulsory acquisition cases, dispossessed owners acting reasonably should not be discouraged from seeking judicial determination by adverse costs orders.

Court Disposition

Respondent to pay the Applicant's costs of the first instance hearing (with exceptions for costs subject to earlier specific orders) and costs of consideration of costs issues.

Orders

  • ["The Respondent is to pay the Applicant's costs of the first instance hearing as agreed or assessed, other than the costs subject of the order made on 27 April 2022 (no order for costs arising from the determination of the challenge by the Respondent to the Applicant's Notice to Produce) and the costs order in the...