Maqableh v Kaklamanis (No 2) [2022] NSWCATAP 177

Maqableh v Kaklamanis (No 2) [2022] NSWCATAP 177

As the Respondent was wholly successful in the appeal and no opposing submissions were filed by the Appellant, there was no reason to depart from the starting point that the successful party is entitled to an order for costs. An oral hearing was unnecessary as written submissions sufficed and there was no contradictor.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Determination of Costs Post Appeal
Outcome
Application for costs granted; oral hearing dispensed with
Legal Topics
['costs' 'appeal Procedure' 'dispensing With Oral Hearing']
['civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'appeal Procedure' 'dispensing With Oral Hearing']

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

Appeal / Determination of Costs Post Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether to award costs of the appeal to the respondent' 'Whether an oral hearing should be dispensed with for determining costs']

Ratio Decidendi

As the Respondent was wholly successful in the appeal and no opposing submissions were filed by the Appellant, there was no reason to depart from the starting point that the successful party is entitled to an order for costs. An oral hearing was unnecessary as written submissions sufficed and there was no contradictor.

Court Disposition

Application for costs granted; oral hearing dispensed with

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to s 50(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, the Tribunal dispenses with an oral hearing of the application.' "The Appellant pay the Respondent's party and party costs of the appeal as agreed or assessed."]