Lakaev v Denny (No 2) [2010] NSWSC 420

Lakaev v Denny (No 2) [2010] NSWSC 420

The undertaking provided by the defendants to retain the image of the hard drive is adequate to address any prejudice, and, accordingly, the Court accepts the undertaking and does not vary the earlier order. As the plaintiff prevailed on the motion except for the written submissions component, the plaintiff is awarded costs of and incidental to the motion (excluding costs of certain written submissions, which are costs in the cause).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Hearing (consequential Orders, Costs)
Outcome
Plaintiff's request for variation of order refused (accepted defendants' undertaking); costs awarded to plaintiff as specified.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'preliminary Discovery' 'defamation' 'preservation of Evidence']
['common Law'] ['costs' 'preliminary Discovery' 'defamation' 'preservation of Evidence']

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

Civil / Post Hearing (consequential Orders, Costs)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Disposition of the hard drive in the possession of the expert following preliminary discovery' 'Entitlement to costs of the motion filed 12 November 2009']

Ratio Decidendi

The undertaking provided by the defendants to retain the image of the hard drive is adequate to address any prejudice, and, accordingly, the Court accepts the undertaking and does not vary the earlier order. As the plaintiff prevailed on the motion except for the written submissions component, the plaintiff is awarded costs of and incidental to the motion (excluding costs of certain written submissions, which are costs in the cause).

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's request for variation of order refused (accepted defendants' undertaking); costs awarded to plaintiff as specified.

Orders

  • ['The Court notes the undertaking by the defendants to retain the image of the hard drive obtained by Robert Atkins pursuant to the orders of Adams J of 8 April 2009 for the purpose of his Report dated 1 October 2009 until conclusion of proceedings 55205/2010 or further order.' "The defendants shall pay the...