Gosford Waterfront Alliance Inc v TO Gosford Pty Ltd [2016] NSWLEC 130

Gosford Waterfront Alliance Inc v TO Gosford Pty Ltd [2016] NSWLEC 130

The first respondent was (or should have been) aware from correspondence that its application for security of costs was unlikely to succeed given r 59.11 of UCPR. The applicant is entitled to costs incurred from complying with court directions and defending the motion, as it would not be just or efficient to reserve costs. Orders are warranted for half of some costs and full recovery of costs for submissions, reflecting the actual work attributable to the motion.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 September 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (class 4) / Order on Motion for Security of Costs
Outcome
First respondent ordered to pay specified costs to applicant.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'security for Costs' 'judicial Review' 'public Interest']
['administrative Law' 'environmental Law'] ['costs' 'security for Costs' 'judicial Review' 'public Interest']

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

Judicial Review (class 4) / Order on Motion for Security of Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether costs should be ordered against the respondent for a withdrawn motion for security of costs' 'Whether the applicant is entitled to costs thrown away' 'When a costs order should be made in such circumstances']

Ratio Decidendi

The first respondent was (or should have been) aware from correspondence that its application for security of costs was unlikely to succeed given r 59.11 of UCPR. The applicant is entitled to costs incurred from complying with court directions and defending the motion, as it would not be just or efficient to reserve costs. Orders are warranted for half of some costs and full recovery of costs for submissions, reflecting the actual work attributable to the motion.

Court Disposition

First respondent ordered to pay specified costs to applicant.

Orders

  • ["The first respondent pay half of the applicant's costs for preparing and attending the directions on 13 September 2016." "The first respondent pay half of the applicant's costs for preparing the affidavit of Ms Braund." "The first respondent pay half of the applicant's costs for appearing at the hearing of the...