Grigoriadis v Sidiropoulos & Anor (No 2) [2019] NSWDC 761

Grigoriadis v Sidiropoulos & Anor (No 2) [2019] NSWDC 761

It was reasonable for the plaintiff to join the Nominal Defendant due to the theory raised by the first defendant's expert, which complicated the proceedings. As the first defendant provided the genesis for this course and did not seek to eschew the issue, the first defendant should bear the costs of the plaintiff and second defendant, including costs thrown away from the vacated hearing. A Sanderson order is appropriate to avoid duplicated costs assessments.

Parties
Plaintiff: Kiparissia Grigoriadis; First Defendant: Harry Sidiropoulos; Second Defendant: The Nominal Defendant
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Judgment, Costs Determination
Outcome
Costs ordered: first defendant to pay costs of plaintiff and second defendant, and plaintiff's costs of vacated hearing.
Legal Topics
Sanderson Order, Bullock Order, Joinder of Defendant, Costs Thrown Away, Vacated Hearing
Costs Sanderson Order Bullock Order Joinder of Defendant Costs Thrown Away Vacated 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kiparissia Grigoriadis

Plaintiff

Harry Sidiropoulos

First Defendant

The Nominal Defendant

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Judgment, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first defendant should pay the plaintiff's and second defendant's costs, including costs relating to the unsuccessful joinder of the Nominal Defendant
  2. 2 Whether a Sanderson or Bullock order is appropriate in the circumstances
  3. 3 Whether costs for the vacated hearing date should be paid

Ratio Decidendi

It was reasonable for the plaintiff to join the Nominal Defendant due to the theory raised by the first defendant's expert, which complicated the proceedings. As the first defendant provided the genesis for this course and did not seek to eschew the issue, the first defendant should bear the costs of the plaintiff and second defendant, including costs thrown away from the vacated hearing. A Sanderson order is appropriate to avoid duplicated costs assessments.

Court Disposition

Costs ordered: first defendant to pay costs of plaintiff and second defendant, and plaintiff's costs of vacated hearing.

Orders

  • The first defendant is to pay the costs of the plaintiff and the second defendant on the ordinary basis as agreed or assessed.
  • The first defendant is to pay the plaintiff's costs of the hearing vacated on 6 December 2016 on the ordinary basis as agreed or assessed.