Quach v Health Care Complaints Commission (No 2) [2015] NSWCA 311

Quach v Health Care Complaints Commission (No 2) [2015] NSWCA 311

The plaintiff was advised that his applications were misconceived and unlikely to succeed but persisted. Indemnity costs were justified from the date the plaintiff was informed of defects, as his conduct matched the type of delinquency warranting such an order.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Procedural and Other Rulings / Costs Order Following Dismissal of Notices of Motion
Outcome
Costs order granted in favour of second defendant, partly on indemnity basis.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'litigant in Person' 'interlocutory Applications']
['civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'litigant in Person' 'interlocutory Applications']

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

Procedural and Other Rulings / Costs Order Following Dismissal of Notices of Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether costs should be awarded on an indemnity basis against a litigant in person.' 'Appropriateness of orders for interlocutory relief (stay and extension of time) sought by plaintiff.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff was advised that his applications were misconceived and unlikely to succeed but persisted. Indemnity costs were justified from the date the plaintiff was informed of defects, as his conduct matched the type of delinquency warranting such an order.

Court Disposition

Costs order granted in favour of second defendant, partly on indemnity basis.

Orders

  • ["Order the plaintiff pay the second defendant's costs of the notices of motion filed on 4 May 2015 and 23 June 2015, assessed on the ordinary basis up to and including 18 June 2015 and thereafter on an indemnity basis."]