Jing Li v Jin Lian Group Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 658

Jing Li v Jin Lian Group Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 658

Indemnity costs were refused because the interlocutory application involved matters of degree, significant matters affecting the outcome occurred during the hearing or after the Calderbank offer, the failure to establish disclosure of confidential information did not show the application was hopeless, and JLG had disavowed any allegation of impropriety against Mills Oakley. Costs were ordered on the ordinary basis and payable forthwith because JLG accepted that the application to restrain solicitors from acting was a separate and discrete aspect of the proceedings whose outcome would subsist irrespective of the winding up proceedings. Entry of the costs orders was not deferred because no...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Costs Application Following Dismissal of Interlocutory Process in Winding Up Proceedings / Costs Determined on the Papers After the Defendant's Interlocutory Application to Restrain Mills Oakley Lawyers Pty Ltd From Acting for the Plaintiff Was Dismissed
Outcome
Mills Oakley was awarded its costs of the interlocutory process on the ordinary basis, payable forthwith; indemnity costs, deferral of entry of the costs orders, and a further interest order were refused.
Legal Topics
['indemnity Costs' 'ordinary Basis Costs' 'calderbank Offer' 'costs Payable Forthwith' 'stay of Costs Order' 'interest on Costs' 'third Party Costs']
['costs' 'civil Procedure'] ['indemnity Costs' 'ordinary Basis Costs' 'calderbank Offer' 'costs Payable Forthwith' 'stay of Costs Order' 'interest on Costs' 'third Party 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Costs Application Following Dismissal of Interlocutory Process in Winding Up Proceedings / Costs Determined on the Papers After the Defendant's Interlocutory Application to Restrain Mills Oakley Lawyers Pty Ltd From Acting for the Plaintiff Was Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Mills Oakley should receive costs on an indemnity basis rather than the ordinary basis after dismissal of JLG's interlocutory application." "Whether JLG's failure to accept a Calderbank walk away offer warranted a special costs order." "Whether JLG's interlocutory application was hopeless or unreasonably pursued so as to justify indemnity costs." 'Whether the costs should be payable forthwith.' 'Whether entry of the costs orders should be deferred pending determination of the winding up proceedings.' 'Whether a further order should be made for interest on costs from the dates costs were paid by Mills Oakley.']

Ratio Decidendi

Indemnity costs were refused because the interlocutory application involved matters of degree, significant matters affecting the outcome occurred during the hearing or after the Calderbank offer, the failure to establish disclosure of confidential information did not show the application was hopeless, and JLG had disavowed any allegation of impropriety against Mills Oakley. Costs were ordered on the ordinary basis and payable forthwith because JLG accepted that the application to restrain solicitors from acting was a separate and discrete aspect of the proceedings whose outcome would subsist irrespective of the winding up proceedings. Entry of the costs orders was not deferred because no...

Court Disposition

Mills Oakley was awarded its costs of the interlocutory process on the ordinary basis, payable forthwith; indemnity costs, deferral of entry of the costs orders, and a further interest order were refused.

Orders

  • ['The defendant to pay the costs of Mills Oakley Lawyers Pty Ltd in respect of the interlocutory process filed 15 March 2018 on the ordinary basis.' 'The costs the subject of order (1) above be paid forthwith.']