Uckan v A & J Verdi Pty Ltd (No 2) [2010] NSWADT 256

Uckan v A & J Verdi Pty Ltd (No 2) [2010] NSWADT 256

There were no exceptional features to justify departing from the default position under section 88; both parties succeeded on one issue each and neither party's arguments were lacking in merit. Accordingly, each party is to bear its own costs.

Parties
Applicant: Metin Uckan; Applicant: Cetin Uckan; Respondent: A & J Verdi Pty; Respondent: Alexander Verdi; Respondent: Julieanne Verdi
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Post Hearing Costs Determination
Outcome
Each party to bear its own costs.
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Tribunal Procedure
Administrative Law Costs Orders Tribunal 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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Metin Uckan

Applicant

Cetin Uckan

Applicant

A & J Verdi Pty

Respondent

Alexander Verdi

Respondent

Julieanne Verdi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Costs Application / Post Hearing Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Should the Tribunal make a costs order or should each party bear its own costs per section 88 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997?

Ratio Decidendi

There were no exceptional features to justify departing from the default position under section 88; both parties succeeded on one issue each and neither party's arguments were lacking in merit. Accordingly, each party is to bear its own costs.

Court Disposition

Each party to bear its own costs.

Orders

  • Each party is to bear its own costs related to the hearing on 30 August 2010.