Taylor v Port Macquarie-Hastings Council [2010] NSWLEC 146

Taylor v Port Macquarie-Hastings Council [2010] NSWLEC 146

Because the respondent raised the disproportionality issue and the supporting motion and affidavit without prior notice during the costs hearing, fairness to the applicants meant that the motion and issue could not be dealt with on their merits that day. The applicants' concession that a costs assessor could later consider any argument that their costs were disproportionate removed prejudice to the respondent, so the late motion was dismissed and the affidavit rejected.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 August 2010
Procedural Posture
Costs Hearing in an Action for Compensation for the Compulsory Acquisition of Land / Respondent's Notice of Motion to Vary Interlocutory Order and Attempt to Read Solicitor's Affidavit During Costs Hearing
Outcome
Respondent's notice of motion dismissed; affidavit rejected.
Legal Topics
['proportionality of Costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'notice of Motion' 'tender of Affidavit Evidence' 'costs Assessment']
['civil Procedure' 'costs' 'land Acquisition Compensation'] ['proportionality of Costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'notice of Motion' 'tender of Affidavit Evidence' 'costs Assessment']

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 Hearing in an Action for Compensation for the Compulsory Acquisition of Land / Respondent's Notice of Motion to Vary Interlocutory Order and Attempt to Read Solicitor's Affidavit During Costs Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the respondent should be permitted, during the costs hearing and without prior notice, to vary the 27 July 2010 order so as to disclose the applicants' costs information to the Court." "Whether the respondent should be permitted to read the affidavit of Steven Miles to support an argument that the applicants' costs were disproportionate."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because the respondent raised the disproportionality issue and the supporting motion and affidavit without prior notice during the costs hearing, fairness to the applicants meant that the motion and issue could not be dealt with on their merits that day. The applicants' concession that a costs assessor could later consider any argument that their costs were disproportionate removed prejudice to the respondent, so the late motion was dismissed and the affidavit rejected.

Court Disposition

Respondent's notice of motion dismissed; affidavit rejected.

Orders

  • ["The respondent's notice of motion of 30 July 2010 is dismissed." 'The affidavit of Steven Thomas Miles of 2 August 2010 is rejected.']