Bassal v Savills (NSW) Pty Ltd (No 3) [2017] NSWSC 911

Bassal v Savills (NSW) Pty Ltd (No 3) [2017] NSWSC 911

The motion was not necessary after parties resolved issues of representation and subpoenas pre-hearing, except for the outstanding notice to produce. However, given the impasse created by solicitor liens and history of correspondence, it was reasonable for the defendant to seek a Court ruling to clarify obligations. Plaintiffs should have brought their own motion earlier. Defendant is entitled to its costs of the motion on the ordinary basis, but not indemnity costs, as plaintiffs’ conduct did not warrant such an order.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Costs Ruling; Interlocutory Application / Determination of Interlocutory Motion and Costs
Outcome
Defendant's Amended Notice of Motion dismissed. Orders made regarding production of documents and costs.
Legal Topics
['discovery' 'subpoena' 'possessory Lien' 'representation of Parties' 'legal Costs']
['practice and Procedure' 'costs'] ['discovery' 'subpoena' 'possessory Lien' 'representation of Parties' 'legal 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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Costs Ruling; Interlocutory Application / Determination of Interlocutory Motion and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether defendant was justified in bringing a motion regarding plaintiffs' legal representation and subpoenas" "Whether the defendant should provide discovered documents notwithstanding a possessory lien claimed by plaintiffs' former solicitors" 'Entitlement and basis for costs ordering arising from the motion']

Ratio Decidendi

The motion was not necessary after parties resolved issues of representation and subpoenas pre-hearing, except for the outstanding notice to produce. However, given the impasse created by solicitor liens and history of correspondence, it was reasonable for the defendant to seek a Court ruling to clarify obligations. Plaintiffs should have brought their own motion earlier. Defendant is entitled to its costs of the motion on the ordinary basis, but not indemnity costs, as plaintiffs’ conduct did not warrant such an order.

Court Disposition

Defendant's Amended Notice of Motion dismissed. Orders made regarding production of documents and costs.

Orders

  • ["The defendant's Amended Notice of Motion of 2 June 2017 is dismissed." 'Within seven days the defendant is to provide the documents requested by the plaintiffs, being the discovered documents and those referred to in the Notice to Admit Facts and Documents of the defendant.' "The plaintiffs are to pay the...