Todd v Jingalong Pty Ltd [No 2] [2014] NSWSC 440

Todd v Jingalong Pty Ltd [No 2] [2014] NSWSC 440

It was appropriate for Mr Pernice to be a party because, depending on the outcome between Mr Todd and Jingalong, he had rights he wished to assert concerning the land and there were common factual issues. The source of the difficulties that brought the parties to court was Jingalong's ultimately unsuccessful assertion of absolute entitlement to the land, making it fair for Jingalong to bear liability for Mr Pernice's costs. However, a 50 per cent discount was warranted because of the commonality between Mr Todd's and Mr Pernice's positions, work directed to a possible dispute between them, and difficulties in aspects of Mr Pernice's cross-claim. No further costs order was made against Mr...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 April 2014
Procedural Posture
Costs / Final Orders Consequent Upon Judgment Delivered on 31 March 2014
Outcome
Costs ordered
Legal Topics
['costs as Between Defendants' 'bullock Orders' 'sanderson Orders' 'constructive Trust' 'indefeasibility']
['costs' 'equity' 'real Property'] ['costs as Between Defendants' 'bullock Orders' 'sanderson Orders' 'constructive Trust' 'indefeasibility']

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 / Final Orders Consequent Upon Judgment Delivered on 31 March 2014

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the second defendant's costs of the proceedings and first cross-claim should be paid by the first defendant through a Bullock or Sanderson order." 'Whether the second defendant was a necessary and proper party to the proceedings.' 'Whether any costs order should be made between the plaintiff and the second defendant in relation to the amended statement of claim.']

Ratio Decidendi

It was appropriate for Mr Pernice to be a party because, depending on the outcome between Mr Todd and Jingalong, he had rights he wished to assert concerning the land and there were common factual issues. The source of the difficulties that brought the parties to court was Jingalong's ultimately unsuccessful assertion of absolute entitlement to the land, making it fair for Jingalong to bear liability for Mr Pernice's costs. However, a 50 per cent discount was warranted because of the commonality between Mr Todd's and Mr Pernice's positions, work directed to a possible dispute between them, and difficulties in aspects of Mr Pernice's cross-claim. No further costs order was made against Mr...

Court Disposition

Costs ordered

Orders

  • ["The first defendant is to pay 50 per cent of the second defendant's costs of and incidental to the proceedings." 'No order as to costs between the plaintiff and the second defendant in relation to the amended statement of claim.' 'Orders made in accordance with the document headed "Order" initialled and dated 10...