SPOONER v SIMMONDS [1996] NSWCA 485

SPOONER v SIMMONDS [1996] NSWCA 485

The rule in SCR Pt52 r17(5) did not apply because the Court had already 'otherwise ordered' in respect of the costs of the first proceedings; thus, Dunford J's discretion in the retrial regarding costs was not fettered by the rule.

Parties
Claimant: Spooner; Opponent: Simmonds
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 October 1996
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal
Outcome
leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Offer of Compromise, Costs Orders, Judicial Discretion
Civil Procedure Costs Offer of Compromise Costs Orders Judicial Discretion

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Spooner

Claimant

Simmonds

Opponent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether SCR Pt52 r17(5) operated to fetter the trial judge's discretion in making costs orders in circumstances where prior costs orders had already been made and confirmed on appeal
  2. 2 Whether there was any proper basis for departing from the general rule laid down in SCR Pt52 r17(5)

Ratio Decidendi

The rule in SCR Pt52 r17(5) did not apply because the Court had already 'otherwise ordered' in respect of the costs of the first proceedings; thus, Dunford J's discretion in the retrial regarding costs was not fettered by the rule.

Court Disposition

leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted.
  • Appeal dismissed.