Namul Pty Ltd CAN 149528914 v Milovan Stankovic (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 262

Namul Pty Ltd CAN 149528914 v Milovan Stankovic (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 262

Indemnity costs were warranted because the defendant deliberately violated the plaintiff's rights by entering the plaintiff's land and affixing and publishing notes that disparaged the plaintiff's title, thereby forcing the plaintiff to bring proceedings, and because the defendant made allegations of fraud that had no proper basis and ought never to have been made.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Application by the Plaintiff for Indemnity Costs After Ex Tempore Judgment
Outcome
Order in favour of the plaintiff for indemnity costs.
Legal Topics
['indemnity Costs' "deliberate Violation of a Party's Rights" 'disparagement of Title' 'trespass' 'allegations of Fraud Without Proper Basis']
['civil Procedure' 'costs' 'torts' 'property'] ['indemnity Costs' "deliberate Violation of a Party's Rights" 'disparagement of Title' 'trespass' 'allegations of Fraud Without Proper Basis']

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 Application / Application by the Plaintiff for Indemnity Costs After Ex Tempore Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiff should receive indemnity costs because the defendant acted in contumelious disregard of the plaintiff's rights and forced the plaintiff to commence proceedings." 'Whether indemnity costs were warranted because the defendant persisted with an allegation that the plaintiff acted fraudulently when no proper basis for that allegation was made out.']

Ratio Decidendi

Indemnity costs were warranted because the defendant deliberately violated the plaintiff's rights by entering the plaintiff's land and affixing and publishing notes that disparaged the plaintiff's title, thereby forcing the plaintiff to bring proceedings, and because the defendant made allegations of fraud that had no proper basis and ought never to have been made.

Court Disposition

Order in favour of the plaintiff for indemnity costs.

Orders

  • ["The defendant is to pay the plaintiff's costs on an indemnity basis."]