Khabiya t/as Samso Wall Printing v Sachdeva & Ors (No. 3) [2019] NSWDC 586

Khabiya t/as Samso Wall Printing v Sachdeva & Ors (No. 3) [2019] NSWDC 586

No evidence demonstrated that the second defendant's conduct caused or contributed to the plaintiff's decision to join the first defendant. The applicant's explanation for failing to submit on costs was unsatisfactory, and the requirements for a Sanderson order were not satisfied. The usual rule applies: the plaintiff must bear the first defendant's costs for failing against him.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside and Vary Costs Order / Post Judgment Costs Determination
Outcome
Application dismissed; costs order stands.
Legal Topics
['setting Aside Costs Orders' 'sanderson and Bullock Orders' 'joinder of Defendants' 'agency Relationships']
['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['setting Aside Costs Orders' 'sanderson and Bullock Orders' 'joinder of Defendants' 'agency Relationships']

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

Application to Set Aside and Vary Costs Order / Post Judgment Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the costs order made against the plaintiff should be set aside or varied to impose a Sanderson order.' 'Whether the conduct of the second defendant makes it fair to impose liability upon it for the costs of the first defendant.' "Adequacy of the applicant's explanation for non-compliance with directions."]

Ratio Decidendi

No evidence demonstrated that the second defendant's conduct caused or contributed to the plaintiff's decision to join the first defendant. The applicant's explanation for failing to submit on costs was unsatisfactory, and the requirements for a Sanderson order were not satisfied. The usual rule applies: the plaintiff must bear the first defendant's costs for failing against him.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; costs order stands.

Orders

  • ["The applicant's notice of motion filed on 27 September 2019 is dismissed." "The applicant is to pay the first defendant's costs of the motion on the ordinary basis."]