Goldana Investments Pty Ltd v Amberdown Pty Ltd (No. 2) [2000] NSWCA 92
The appellant was entitled to its costs of the partially successful and necessary appeal because nothing disentitled it to the ordinary order, but no order should be made for the trial costs because the effect of the Court's orders was that both the claim and counter-claim failed and the disputes concerning each lease clause were of equal importance.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 14 April 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Costs Appeal / Decided on Written Submissions
- Outcome
- Respondent to pay appellant's costs of appeal. No order for costs of the trial.
- Legal Topics
- ['costs of Appeal' 'costs of Trial' 'partially Successful Appeal' 'lease Clauses']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Costs Appeal / Decided on Written Submissions
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the appellant should have its costs of its partially successful appeal.' 'Whether any order should be made for the costs of the trial where both the claim and cross-claim failed.']
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant was entitled to its costs of the partially successful and necessary appeal because nothing disentitled it to the ordinary order, but no order should be made for the trial costs because the effect of the Court's orders was that both the claim and counter-claim failed and the disputes concerning each lease clause were of equal importance.
Court Disposition
Respondent to pay appellant's costs of appeal. No order for costs of the trial.
Orders
- ["Respondent to pay appellant's costs of appeal." 'No order for costs of the trial.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment