Quach v Horvarth [2022] NSWSC 694

Quach v Horvarth [2022] NSWSC 694

On the affidavit evidence and applying the principles governing gross sum costs orders, the orders sought by the defendant and the Medical Council were appropriate. The history of the litigation and the plaintiff's continuing attempts to challenge earlier decisions indicated that a formal costs assessment would likely be protracted and expensive, and the sums sought were reasonable. The variation to Campbell J's orders was appropriate to clarify that the Council's costs included the costs of its 9 June 2021 motion, and the correction was appropriate because the reference to paragraph [10] was a typographical error and should have referred to paragraph [12].

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Practice and Procedure; Costs Applications / Post Dismissal Notices of Motion for Gross Sum Costs Orders and Variation or Correction of Orders
Outcome
Defendant's and Medical Council's applications granted; gross sum costs orders made; Campbell J's orders varied and corrected.
Legal Topics
['gross Sum Costs Orders' 'variation of Orders' 'correction of Orders' 'costs Assessment']
['practice and Procedure' 'costs'] ['gross Sum Costs Orders' 'variation of Orders' 'correction of Orders' 'costs Assessment']

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

Practice and Procedure; Costs Applications / Post Dismissal Notices of Motion for Gross Sum Costs Orders and Variation or Correction of Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether gross sum costs orders should be made in favour of the defendant and the Medical Council of New South Wales under s 98(4)(c) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW).' "Whether Campbell J's orders made on 14 March 2022 should be varied under r 36.16(3A) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) to include the Medical Council's costs of its notice of motion dated 9 June 2021." "Whether Campbell J's orders made on 14 March 2022 should be corrected under r 36.17 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) by replacing a reference to paragraph [10] with a reference to paragraph [12]."]

Ratio Decidendi

On the affidavit evidence and applying the principles governing gross sum costs orders, the orders sought by the defendant and the Medical Council were appropriate. The history of the litigation and the plaintiff's continuing attempts to challenge earlier decisions indicated that a formal costs assessment would likely be protracted and expensive, and the sums sought were reasonable. The variation to Campbell J's orders was appropriate to clarify that the Council's costs included the costs of its 9 June 2021 motion, and the correction was appropriate because the reference to paragraph [10] was a typographical error and should have referred to paragraph [12].

Court Disposition

Defendant's and Medical Council's applications granted; gross sum costs orders made; Campbell J's orders varied and corrected.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to s 98(4)(c) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), the plaintiff is to pay the costs of the defendant in the gross sum of $10,414.09.' 'Pursuant to r 36.16(3A) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), the orders of Campbell J made on 14 March 2022 are varied by adding to order [4] the words "and...