Deering v Attard [2024] NSWSC 1660

Deering v Attard [2024] NSWSC 1660

The court declined to order indemnity costs, finding that while the plaintiff's equitable easement claim lacked reasonable prospects, the s 88K claim did not; the ordinary basis for costs should apply.

Parties
Plaintiff: Jack Bernard Deering; Defendant: Luke Joseph Attard
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Post Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff to pay defendant's costs on the ordinary basis as agreed or assessed.
Legal Topics
Costs
Equity Costs

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jack Bernard Deering

Plaintiff

Luke Joseph Attard

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs Application / Post Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should be awarded on an indemnity basis or ordinary basis under s 98 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW)

Ratio Decidendi

The court declined to order indemnity costs, finding that while the plaintiff's equitable easement claim lacked reasonable prospects, the s 88K claim did not; the ordinary basis for costs should apply.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff to pay defendant's costs on the ordinary basis as agreed or assessed.

Orders

  • Order that the plaintiff is to pay the defendant's costs of the proceedings on the ordinary basis, as agreed or assessed.