Gani v Maiolo (No 2) (RLD) [2012] NSWADTAP 21

Gani v Maiolo (No 2) (RLD) [2012] NSWADTAP 21

Given the substantial disparity between the relative strengths of the parties' cases, the nature of the proceedings (unsuccessful appeal under the Retail Leases Act 1994), and the inadequacy of the appellant's evidence, it is fair to order the appellant to pay the respondents' costs of the appeal under section 88(1A)(c) and (d) of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997.

Parties
Appellant: Mohammad Murul Gani; Respondent: Maria Maiolo; Respondent: Raffaele Maiolo
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal (internal) / Costs Determination After Unsuccessful Appeal
Outcome
Appellant to pay Respondents' costs of the appeal, as agreed or assessed.
Legal Topics
Retail Shop Leases, Costs on Appeal, Relative Strengths of Parties' Cases
Administrative Law Commercial Law Retail Shop Leases Costs on Appeal Relative Strengths of Parties' Cases

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohammad Murul Gani

Appellant

Maria Maiolo

Respondent

Raffaele Maiolo

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (internal) / Costs Determination After Unsuccessful Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it is fair to award costs of the appeal against the unsuccessful appellant under s 88(1A) of the ADT Act
  2. 2 Whether the disparity in strengths between the parties' cases justifies a costs order
  3. 3 Whether appellant's conduct in filing late submissions impacts costs

Ratio Decidendi

Given the substantial disparity between the relative strengths of the parties' cases, the nature of the proceedings (unsuccessful appeal under the Retail Leases Act 1994), and the inadequacy of the appellant's evidence, it is fair to order the appellant to pay the respondents' costs of the appeal under section 88(1A)(c) and (d) of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997.

Court Disposition

Appellant to pay Respondents' costs of the appeal, as agreed or assessed.

Orders

  • The Appellant is to pay the Respondents' costs of the appeal, as agreed or assessed.