In the matter of GPM Constructions Pty Ltd – Oreb v GPM Constructions Pty Ltd [2020] NSWSC 1127

In the matter of GPM Constructions Pty Ltd – Oreb v GPM Constructions Pty Ltd [2020] NSWSC 1127

The plaintiffs were not totally successful and many disputes were compromised, but they were significantly more successful than the defendants; the defendants' cross-claim was unsuccessful, although not fully litigated. The defendants' pre-proceeding conduct did not warrant indemnity costs. A percentage order was preferable to issue-by-issue costs, so the defendants were ordered to pay 85% of the plaintiffs' costs of the originating process and the cross-claim.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Costs in Equity Proceedings Concerning Disputes Arising Out of a Deed of Settlement and Release / Determination of Costs After Substantive Disputes Were Resolved by Agreement or Provisional Rulings
Outcome
Defendants ordered to pay 85% of the plaintiffs' costs of the originating process and the cross-claim.
Legal Topics
['party/party Costs' 'costs Discretion' 'costs Where Neither Party Entirely Successful' 'deed of Settlement and Release' 'access to Company Books and Records' 'construction of Deed Provisions']
['costs' 'equity' 'contract'] ['party/party Costs' 'costs Discretion' 'costs Where Neither Party Entirely Successful' 'deed of Settlement and Release' 'access to Company Books and Records' 'construction of Deed Provisions']

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 in Equity Proceedings Concerning Disputes Arising Out of a Deed of Settlement and Release / Determination of Costs After Substantive Disputes Were Resolved by Agreement or Provisional Rulings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the defendants should pay the plaintiffs' costs where the plaintiffs achieved a measure of success but were not totally successful." "Whether the defendants' pre-proceeding conduct warranted indemnity costs." 'Whether costs should be ordered by reference to particular issues or as a percentage of total costs.' "The extent of the plaintiffs' success on disputes concerning access to documents, construction of clauses 2.1(j), 2.1(k) and 4.2 of the Deed of Settlement, and the defendants' cross-claim."]

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs were not totally successful and many disputes were compromised, but they were significantly more successful than the defendants; the defendants' cross-claim was unsuccessful, although not fully litigated. The defendants' pre-proceeding conduct did not warrant indemnity costs. A percentage order was preferable to issue-by-issue costs, so the defendants were ordered to pay 85% of the plaintiffs' costs of the originating process and the cross-claim.

Court Disposition

Defendants ordered to pay 85% of the plaintiffs' costs of the originating process and the cross-claim.

Orders

  • ["The defendants pay 85% of the plaintiffs' costs of the originating process and the cross-claim." 'GPM Constructions Pty Ltd produce to Peter Oreb, on or before 3 July 2020, the documents in categories 29, 33, 42 and 44 of Schedule A attached to the orders.' 'Within 7 days, Peter Oreb must produce to GPM...