Combis and Staatz as Joint and Several Liquidators of RB Hospitality Holdings Pty Limited (In Liquidation) v Lee (No. 2) [2020] NSWSC 1828

Combis and Staatz as Joint and Several Liquidators of RB Hospitality Holdings Pty Limited (In Liquidation) v Lee (No. 2) [2020] NSWSC 1828

Plaintiffs succeeded entirely on the separate questions hearing; appropriate order is that costs should follow the event, with Defendant ordered to pay Plaintiffs' costs of the hearing on the ordinary basis as agreed or assessed. No order for costs regarding the earlier separate questions application, as Defendant achieved temporary success there.

Parties
Plaintiffs: Nick Combis and Steven Staatz as joint and several liquidators of RB Hospitality Holdings Pty Ltd (In Liquidation); Defendant: Richard Andrew John Lee
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Post Answers to Separate Questions
Outcome
Costs ordered in favour of Plaintiffs for the separate questions hearing; no order as to costs for earlier application; further directions for procedural matters.
Legal Topics
Costs, Separate Questions, Liquidation
Civil Procedure Costs Separate Questions Liquidation

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nick Combis and Steven Staatz as joint and several liquidators of RB Hospitality Holdings Pty Ltd (In Liquidation)

Plaintiffs

Richard Andrew John Lee

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs Application / Post Answers to Separate Questions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate costs order following determination of separate questions under Rule 28.2 UCPR
  2. 2 Whether costs should follow the event
  3. 3 Whether costs should be reserved pending final determination

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiffs succeeded entirely on the separate questions hearing; appropriate order is that costs should follow the event, with Defendant ordered to pay Plaintiffs' costs of the hearing on the ordinary basis as agreed or assessed. No order for costs regarding the earlier separate questions application, as Defendant achieved temporary success there.

Court Disposition

Costs ordered in favour of Plaintiffs for the separate questions hearing; no order as to costs for earlier application; further directions for procedural matters.

Orders

  • The Defendant is to pay the Plaintiffs' costs of the separate questions hearing on 16 November 2020 on the ordinary basis as agreed or assessed.
  • No order as to costs for the separate questions application before Davies J.