TEDESCHI v FRANKLINS LIMITED [1994] NSWCA 306

The trial judge wrongly exercised discretion by awarding costs against the defendant on the basis of a fictional connection to its amendment application, when the costs in question were caused by breakdown of the court's listing system, not the defendant's actions.

Parties: Claimant: Tedesci; Defendant: Franklins Limited
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 24 October 1994
Procedural Posture: Application for Leave to Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision on Application for Leave to Appeal Against Costs Order
Outcome: Leave to appeal granted, appeal allowed, costs order (order 5) set aside, opponent to pay claimant's costs of the summons, and certificate under the Suitors Fund Act granted.
Legal Topics: Costs, Appeals, Discretion of Judge, Defamation

Civil Procedure Costs Appeals Discretion of Judge Defamation

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

Parties

Tedesci

Claimant

Franklins Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision on Application for Leave to Appeal Against Costs Order

Legal Issues

1 Whether trial judge wrongly exercised discretion in awarding costs against defendant for 'not reached' hearing resulting from court listing breakdown

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted, appeal allowed, costs order (order 5) set aside, opponent to pay claimant's costs of the summons, and certificate under the Suitors Fund Act granted.

Orders

Leave to appeal granted
Appeal allowed