GB v EB (No 2) [2023] NSWDC 185

GB v EB (No 2) [2023] NSWDC 185

While UCPR r 50.16A provides discretion to vary the usual costs order for procedural non-compliance, the plaintiff has not shown that costs associated with the appeal would have been materially different had the defendants complied. No compelling circumstances justify depriving the successful defendants of costs, and ordinary, not indemnity, costs should follow the event.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Post Appeal, Costs Determination
Outcome
Costs order; plaintiff to pay defendants' costs in gross sum.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'uniform Civil Procedure Rules' 'appeal Competency']

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 Application / Post Appeal, Costs Determination

  1. 1 ["Whether the defendants' failure to comply with UCPR r 50.16A alters the usual order that costs follow the event" 'Whether costs should be awarded on an indemnity basis or on the ordinary basis' "Whether the referee's report on costs should be adopted"]

Ratio Decidendi

While UCPR r 50.16A provides discretion to vary the usual costs order for procedural non-compliance, the plaintiff has not shown that costs associated with the appeal would have been materially different had the defendants complied. No compelling circumstances justify depriving the successful defendants of costs, and ordinary, not indemnity, costs should follow the event.

Court Disposition

Costs order; plaintiff to pay defendants' costs in gross sum.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiff pay the defendants' costs pursuant to s 98 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) in the gross sum of $67,681.92." 'Exhibits retained until further order.']