Senses Northbridge Pty Ltd v Sahab Holdings Pty Ltd (No 2) [2019] NSWSC 1458

Senses Northbridge Pty Ltd v Sahab Holdings Pty Ltd (No 2) [2019] NSWSC 1458

Senses obtained the substantive relief it had offered to accept on 27 March 2019 and thereby achieved a result more favourable than its unaccepted offer, supporting the costs order it sought. However, because Senses' later conventional estoppel claim was unsuccessful and the affidavit evidence served after 12 June...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Costs / Determination on the Papers of Costs Following Principal Reasons and an Order for Specific Performance
Outcome
Costs ordered substantially in favour of the plaintiff, with an exclusion for costs relating to the unsuccessful conventional estoppel issue.
Legal Topics
['ordinary Costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'offer of Compromise or Settlement Offer' 'conventional Estoppel' 'specific Performance']
['costs' 'equity'] ['ordinary Costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'offer of Compromise or Settlement Offer' 'conventional Estoppel' 'specific Performance']

Source-derived case record

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 / Determination on the Papers of Costs Following Principal Reasons and an Order for Specific Performance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Sahab should pay Senses' costs up to 26 March 2019 on the ordinary basis and after that date on the indemnity basis." "Whether costs incurred in relation to Senses' unsuccessful conventional estoppel claim should be excluded from the costs payable by Sahab." 'Whether existing costs orders made by Sackar J should be disturbed.']

Ratio Decidendi

Senses obtained the substantive relief it had offered to accept on 27 March 2019 and thereby achieved a result more favourable than its unaccepted offer, supporting the costs order it sought. However, because Senses' later conventional estoppel claim was unsuccessful and the affidavit evidence served after 12 June 2019 went to that claim, Sahab should not pay those costs and Senses should bear Sahab's costs in relation to that issue.

Court Disposition

Costs ordered substantially in favour of the plaintiff, with an exclusion for costs relating to the unsuccessful conventional estoppel issue.

Orders

  • ["Except in so far as orders for costs have already been made, defendant to pay plaintiff's costs up to 26 March 2019 on the ordinary basis and pay costs after that date on the indemnity basis, save for costs in relation to the question of conventional estoppel." "The plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs in...