Fathullah v Varma (No.2) [2013] NSWADT 13

Fathullah v Varma (No.2) [2013] NSWADT 13

The Tribunal was not satisfied it would be fair, based on the statutory factors and the merits of both parties’ claims and conduct, to depart from the statutory presumption that each party bears their own costs.

Parties
Applicant: Nihad Fathullah; 1st Respondent: Arun Deo Varma; 2nd Respondent: Kamlesh Deo Varma; 3rd Respondent: Aronesh Deo Varma
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 January 2013
Procedural Posture
Application for Costs in Retail Leases Division / Post Hearing Costs Determination
Outcome
Each party to bear their own costs
Legal Topics
Costs, Retail Leases
Administrative Law Commercial Law Costs Retail Leases

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nihad Fathullah

Applicant

Arun Deo Varma

1st Respondent

Kamlesh Deo Varma

2nd Respondent

Aronesh Deo Varma

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Costs in Retail Leases Division / Post Hearing Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it is fair to depart from the statutory presumption that each party bears its own costs under section 88 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997
  2. 2 Whether conduct of parties justifies a costs order
  3. 3 Enforceability of costs agreement involving agent representation

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was not satisfied it would be fair, based on the statutory factors and the merits of both parties’ claims and conduct, to depart from the statutory presumption that each party bears their own costs.

Court Disposition

Each party to bear their own costs

Orders

  • Each party is to bear their own costs of these proceedings.