Coshott v Barry [2014] NSWSC 238

Although the plaintiff succeeded on part of the Limitation Act argument, the failure on the fundamental issue led to refusal of relief; the usual order for costs should be made to the defendants.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 04 June 2014
Procedural Posture: Costs Application / Post Judgment Costs Determination
Outcome: Plaintiff to pay defendants' costs; plaintiff to pay interest on defendants' counsel fees
Legal Topics: ['costs Apportionment' 'limitation Act' 'enforcement of Certificates' 'interest on Costs']

['civil Procedure'] ['costs Apportionment' 'limitation Act' 'enforcement of Certificates' 'interest on 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

Procedural Posture

Costs Application / Post Judgment Costs Determination

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether costs should be apportioned given partial success on Limitation Act argument' 'Whether the plaintiff should pay interest on assessed costs' 'Effect of the Limitation Act on certificates and judgments issued under the Legal Profession Act']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the plaintiff succeeded on part of the Limitation Act argument, the failure on the fundamental issue led to refusal of relief; the usual order for costs should be made to the defendants.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff to pay defendants' costs; plaintiff to pay interest on defendants' counsel fees

Orders

["The plaintiff is to pay the defendants' costs, including costs reserved and their costs of representing themselves" "Pursuant to s 101(4) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), the plaintiff is to pay interest on the amounts assessed in respect of the fees of the defendants' counsel from the dates of payment"]