Symes v Mick Fabar Constructions Pty Ltd (No 2) [2016] NSWSC 69

Symes v Mick Fabar Constructions Pty Ltd (No 2) [2016] NSWSC 69

Although the defendant was the successful party in the Supreme Court costs application context, neither party engaged in disentitling conduct, both parties had pursued appeals that were wholly unsuccessful and failed at the leave stage, and the NCAT costs approach and objectives favoured each party bearing their own costs absent special circumstance or malfeasance. The appropriate order was therefore that each party bear their own costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Costs Judgment Arising Out of a Building Construction Dispute and NCAT Appeal / On the Papers; Application for Costs After Leave to Appeal Was Refused
Outcome
Each party is to bear their own costs.
Legal Topics
['ncat Costs' 'costs Follow the Event' 'discretion as to Costs' 'leave to Appeal' 'building Construction Dispute']
['costs' 'civil Procedure' 'administrative Law'] ['ncat Costs' 'costs Follow the Event' 'discretion as to Costs' 'leave to Appeal' 'building Construction Dispute']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Costs Judgment Arising Out of a Building Construction Dispute and NCAT Appeal / On the Papers; Application for Costs After Leave to Appeal Was Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the defendant should receive an order for costs of the plaintiffs' unsuccessful proceedings in the Supreme Court." 'Whether the Court should depart from the usual order that costs follow the event in circumstances involving unsuccessful appeals and the costs objectives of NCAT.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the defendant was the successful party in the Supreme Court costs application context, neither party engaged in disentitling conduct, both parties had pursued appeals that were wholly unsuccessful and failed at the leave stage, and the NCAT costs approach and objectives favoured each party bearing their own costs absent special circumstance or malfeasance. The appropriate order was therefore that each party bear their own costs.

Court Disposition

Each party is to bear their own costs.

Orders

  • ['Each party is to bear their own costs.']