OWNERS - STRATA PLAN 156 v GRAY [NO 2] [2004] NSWCA 338

OWNERS - STRATA PLAN 156 v GRAY [NO 2] [2004] NSWCA 338

Because the argument on the hearing was directed mostly to the appeal, and the appellant succeeded in significantly reducing the damages awarded against it, the appellant should have its costs of the appeal. The respondent should receive a certificate under the Suitors' Fund Act 1951, and because the cross-appeal was not seriously argued there should be no order for its costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 September 2004
Procedural Posture
Costs of Appeal / Court of Appeal Determination of Costs and Restitution After Judgment on Appeal; No Order for Restitution Sought
Outcome
Respondent to pay the appellant's costs of the appeal but to have a certificate under the Suitors' Fund Act 1951; no order for the costs of the cross-appeal.
Legal Topics
['costs of Appeal' 'cross Appeal Costs' "suitors' Fund Certificate"]
['costs' 'civil Procedure'] ['costs of Appeal' 'cross Appeal Costs' "suitors' Fund Certificate"]

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

Costs of Appeal / Court of Appeal Determination of Costs and Restitution After Judgment on Appeal; No Order for Restitution Sought

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the respondent should pay the appellant's costs of the appeal after the appellant succeeded in significantly reducing the damages award." 'Whether any costs order should be made in relation to the cross-appeal.' "Whether the respondent should have a certificate under the Suitors' Fund Act 1951."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because the argument on the hearing was directed mostly to the appeal, and the appellant succeeded in significantly reducing the damages awarded against it, the appellant should have its costs of the appeal. The respondent should receive a certificate under the Suitors' Fund Act 1951, and because the cross-appeal was not seriously argued there should be no order for its costs.

Court Disposition

Respondent to pay the appellant's costs of the appeal but to have a certificate under the Suitors' Fund Act 1951; no order for the costs of the cross-appeal.

Orders

  • ["The respondent pay the appellant's costs of the appeal." "The respondent have a certificate under the Suitors' Fund Act 1951." 'No order for the costs of the cross-appeal.']