Carmichael & Others v Pittwater Council [2004] NSWLEC 711

Carmichael & Others v Pittwater Council [2004] NSWLEC 711

Given the interlinked nature of the three appeals and the shared agreement for court appointed experts, the discontinuance of the merit appeal resulted in completion of the matter, not an adjournment. It is not reasonable to penalise the applicant with a costs order for the expert report, as these are not 'costs thrown away' in the traditional sense.

Parties
Applicant: Mark Carmichael; Applicant: Louise Carmichael; Applicant: Daryn Carmichael; Applicant: Josephine Natalie Carmichael; Respondent: Pittwater Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 December 2004
Procedural Posture
Application for Costs / Post Discontinuance of Merit Appeal
Outcome
costs application dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs, Discontinuance of Appeal
Civil Procedure Costs Discontinuance of Appeal

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Carmichael

Applicant

Louise Carmichael

Applicant

Daryn Carmichael

Applicant

Josephine Natalie Carmichael

Applicant

Pittwater Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Costs / Post Discontinuance of Merit Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should pay the respondent's costs after discontinuing the merit appeal (Appeal 11112/04) shortly before the hearing.

Ratio Decidendi

Given the interlinked nature of the three appeals and the shared agreement for court appointed experts, the discontinuance of the merit appeal resulted in completion of the matter, not an adjournment. It is not reasonable to penalise the applicant with a costs order for the expert report, as these are not 'costs thrown away' in the traditional sense.

Court Disposition

costs application dismissed

Orders

  • The cost application is dismissed.