Sinclair v Camnet Finance Pty Ltd (No 2) [2022] NSWCATAP 154

Sinclair v Camnet Finance Pty Ltd (No 2) [2022] NSWCATAP 154

The Appeal Panel was not satisfied that the amount claimed or truly in dispute on the appeal was greater than $30,000. The appellant sought a declaration that she was not liable for $31,164.72, not an order that she be paid money, so she did not claim an amount for r 38(2)(b). Although some amount was in dispute because she sought relief from liability under the guarantee, the true amount owed was uncertain, including because of possible sale of returned goods and mitigation issues. The respondent bore the onus of proving that the amount truly in dispute exceeded $30,000 and did not do so. No special circumstances argument was advanced.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Costs Application in an Internal Appeal / On the Papers After Dismissal of the Appeal
Outcome
Respondent's application for costs dismissed; each party to pay its own costs of the appeal.
Legal Topics
['costs in NCAT Appeals' 'civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 (nsw), R 38(2)(b)' 'amount Claimed or in Dispute' 'guarantee Liability']
['civil Procedure' 'costs' 'consumer and Commercial Proceedings'] ['costs in NCAT Appeals' 'civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 (nsw), R 38(2)(b)' 'amount Claimed or in Dispute' 'guarantee Liability']

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 in an Internal Appeal / On the Papers After Dismissal of the Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the amount claimed or in dispute on the appeal was greater than $30,000 for the purposes of r 38(2)(b) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 (NSW).' 'Whether the respondent had proved an entitlement to costs of the appeal.' 'Whether any special circumstances warranted an award of costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel was not satisfied that the amount claimed or truly in dispute on the appeal was greater than $30,000. The appellant sought a declaration that she was not liable for $31,164.72, not an order that she be paid money, so she did not claim an amount for r 38(2)(b). Although some amount was in dispute because she sought relief from liability under the guarantee, the true amount owed was uncertain, including because of possible sale of returned goods and mitigation issues. The respondent bore the onus of proving that the amount truly in dispute exceeded $30,000 and did not do so. No special circumstances argument was advanced.

Court Disposition

Respondent's application for costs dismissed; each party to pay its own costs of the appeal.

Orders

  • ["Each party is to pay the party's own costs of the appeal."]