Owners Strata Plan 58577 v Banmor Developments Finance Pty Ltd [2006] NSWSC 171

Owners Strata Plan 58577 v Banmor Developments Finance Pty Ltd [2006] NSWSC 171

Costs were refused because Doctor Robinson's request for payment in advance of reasonable expenses of complying with the broad subpoena was reasonable, the subpoena was particularly wide and likely oppressive, and it was not appropriate in those circumstances to order him to pay the plaintiff's costs of the withdrawn Notice of Motion.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 March 2006
Procedural Posture
Practice Subpoenas / Recipient of Subpoena Withdrew Notice of Motion Seeking Payment of Expenses; Issuer of Subpoena Sought Costs of That Notice of Motion
Outcome
Costs refused
Legal Topics
['subpoenas to Produce Documents' 'reasonable Expenses of Compliance With Subpoena' 'payment in Advance of Subpoena Compliance Expenses' 'costs of Notice of Motion']
['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['subpoenas to Produce Documents' 'reasonable Expenses of Compliance With Subpoena' 'payment in Advance of Subpoena Compliance Expenses' 'costs of Notice of Motion']

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

Practice Subpoenas / Recipient of Subpoena Withdrew Notice of Motion Seeking Payment of Expenses; Issuer of Subpoena Sought Costs of That Notice of Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the issuer of a subpoena should receive costs of a Notice of Motion taken out by the subpoena recipient for payment of expenses after the recipient withdrew the motion.' "Whether the subpoena recipient's request for payment in advance of expenses of compliance was reasonable."]

Ratio Decidendi

Costs were refused because Doctor Robinson's request for payment in advance of reasonable expenses of complying with the broad subpoena was reasonable, the subpoena was particularly wide and likely oppressive, and it was not appropriate in those circumstances to order him to pay the plaintiff's costs of the withdrawn Notice of Motion.

Court Disposition

Costs refused

Orders

  • ['The application for costs is rejected.']