Blashki v Utara [2003] NSWSC 1111

Blashki v Utara [2003] NSWSC 1111

There was no sufficient justification to depart from the general rule that costs follow the event, as the issues were not truly discrete with substantial time spent, nor was the discrete guarantee issue substantial enough for a separate order. The defendant is to pay the plaintiff’s costs of the proceedings.

Parties
Plaintiff: Phillip Sydney Blashki; Defendant: Ida Bagus Utara
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 November 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Judgment Costs Order
Outcome
Defendant ordered to pay the plaintiff’s costs of the proceedings.
Legal Topics
Costs, General Rule, Costs Follow the Event, Multiple Issues, Special Order for Costs
Procedure Equity Costs General Rule Costs Follow the Event Multiple Issues Special Order for Costs

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Phillip Sydney Blashki

Plaintiff

Ida Bagus Utara

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Judgment Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a special order for costs should be made given the presence of multiple issues and partial success by the defendant
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff’s late amendment and the discrete guarantee issue justify a departure from the general rule that costs follow the event

Ratio Decidendi

There was no sufficient justification to depart from the general rule that costs follow the event, as the issues were not truly discrete with substantial time spent, nor was the discrete guarantee issue substantial enough for a separate order. The defendant is to pay the plaintiff’s costs of the proceedings.

Court Disposition

Defendant ordered to pay the plaintiff’s costs of the proceedings.

Orders

  • The defendant pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings.