Short v Crawley (No. 45) [2013] NSWSC 1541
The Supreme Court has power under s 98(3)-(4) of the Civil Procedure Act to make a gross sum costs order and an order for interest on costs even where the application is made more than 14 days after entry of final costs orders, provided such orders are sought before costs are referred for assessment. The principle of finality of litigation is not offended as such supplemental orders do not alter the substance of the parties' rights but only affect the mode and extent of costs quantified. It is not necessary for the plaintiffs to seek a dispensation of the rules under s 14 in these circumstances.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 23 October 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Application in Existing Proceedings / Determination of Separate Questions Prior to Determining Substantive Application
- Outcome
- Court answers separate questions: (1) Yes, the Court has power to make the orders sought; (2) Dispensation under s 14 does not arise.
- Legal Topics
- ['gross Sum Costs Order' 'interest on Costs' 'variation of Orders' 'civil Procedure Act 2005 S 98' 'uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 R 36.16' 'finality of Litigation' 'timing of Costs Applications']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application in Existing Proceedings / Determination of Separate Questions Prior to Determining Substantive Application
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the Court has power to make a gross sum costs order after a final costs order has been made and not applied for within 14 days under UCPR r 36.16(3A)' 'Whether the Court has power to make an order for interest on costs applied for after 14 days of the relevant order']
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court has power under s 98(3)-(4) of the Civil Procedure Act to make a gross sum costs order and an order for interest on costs even where the application is made more than 14 days after entry of final costs orders, provided such orders are sought before costs are referred for assessment. The principle of finality of litigation is not offended as such supplemental orders do not alter the substance of the parties' rights but only affect the mode and extent of costs quantified. It is not necessary for the plaintiffs to seek a dispensation of the rules under s 14 in these circumstances.
Court Disposition
Court answers separate questions: (1) Yes, the Court has power to make the orders sought; (2) Dispensation under s 14 does not arise.
Orders
- ['The Court has power to make the orders sought in the further amended notice of motion filed on 14 June 2013.' 'As the answer is yes, it is unnecessary to consider dispensing with any requirement under s 14 of the Civil Procedure Act.']
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