White v Patterson [2008] NSWSC 1395

White v Patterson [2008] NSWSC 1395

The 'event' for costs purposes was comprehensive success by the plaintiff; costs should follow the event without adjustment as there were no special circumstances warranting a different order.

Parties
Plaintiff: Leanne Michelle White; First Defendant: David Joseph Patterson; Second Defendant: Alice Mia Vors Patterson by her tutor Evelyn Ann Eyland
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 December 2008
Procedural Posture
Property Adjustment / Post Judgment (costs Determination)
Outcome
Costs orders made; other consequential orders on property, transfer and caveat.
Legal Topics
Costs, Property Adjustment, Property (relationships) Act 1984

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 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leanne Michelle White

Plaintiff

David Joseph Patterson

First Defendant

Alice Mia Vors Patterson by her tutor Evelyn Ann Eyland

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Property Adjustment / Post Judgment (costs Determination)

  1. 1 Appropriate costs order following property adjustment under s 20 of Property (Relationships) Act 1984

Ratio Decidendi

The 'event' for costs purposes was comprehensive success by the plaintiff; costs should follow the event without adjustment as there were no special circumstances warranting a different order.

Court Disposition

Costs orders made; other consequential orders on property, transfer and caveat.

Orders

  • Order that the interests of the plaintiff and the first defendant with respect to property be adjusted so that (a) the plaintiff transfer one Maple-Ferryman share (if held) to the first defendant; (b) the first defendant pay the plaintiff $250,000; (c) each otherwise hold and enjoy their separate property.
  • Order that the transfer and payment be made within sixty days.