ASSAF v CHARISMA DEVELOPMENTS PTY LTD (COSTS) [2009] NSWSC 622

ASSAF v CHARISMA DEVELOPMENTS PTY LTD (COSTS) [2009] NSWSC 622

Given the excessive and, in part, unnecessary volume and duplication of expert and medical reports obtained and relied upon by the Plaintiff, it would not be reasonable for the First Defendant to bear all of the Plaintiff's costs. A reduction in the usual order for costs is warranted, both to reflect the unreasonableness of certain costs incurred and to take account of additional costs incurred by the Defendant in consequence. The Court therefore orders that the First Defendant pay 80% of the Plaintiff's costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil / Costs Judgment Following Judgment on Liability and Quantum
Outcome
First Defendant ordered to pay 80% of Plaintiff's costs.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'expert Evidence' 'workers Compensation' 'damages' 'occupational Health and Safety' 'pre Filing Procedure']
['personal Injury' 'workplace Health and Safety' 'civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'expert Evidence' 'workers Compensation' 'damages' 'occupational Health and Safety' 'pre Filing Procedure']

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

Civil / Costs Judgment Following Judgment on Liability and Quantum

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the costs of certain expert and medical reports should be recoverable by the Plaintiff' 'Whether the preparation and use of a large volume of medical and expert reports was reasonable and necessary' "What proportion of the Plaintiff's costs should be paid by the First Defendant"]

Ratio Decidendi

Given the excessive and, in part, unnecessary volume and duplication of expert and medical reports obtained and relied upon by the Plaintiff, it would not be reasonable for the First Defendant to bear all of the Plaintiff's costs. A reduction in the usual order for costs is warranted, both to reflect the unreasonableness of certain costs incurred and to take account of additional costs incurred by the Defendant in consequence. The Court therefore orders that the First Defendant pay 80% of the Plaintiff's costs.

Court Disposition

First Defendant ordered to pay 80% of Plaintiff's costs.

Orders

  • ["First Defendant to pay 80% of Plaintiff's costs. Order made only against First Defendant, in accordance with prior agreement between the parties." 'Any questions as between Plaintiff and his solicitors as to costs to be stood over for further consideration.']