Stojanovski v Stojanovski (No 4) [2021] NSWSC 800

Stojanovski v Stojanovski (No 4) [2021] NSWSC 800

The second defendant was not entitled to a costs order, as she had only filed a submitting appearance, was not required to participate in the main proceedings, and the costs she incurred were either for her own legal advice or related to an unprosecuted application. No substantive relief was sought by or against her, and her application for costs lacked a proper basis.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Post Judgment
Outcome
Second defendant's application for orders for her costs of the proceedings is dismissed.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'self Represented Litigant' 'family Provision' 'party/party Costs']
['equity'] ['costs' 'self Represented Litigant' 'family Provision' 'party/party 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 Application / Post Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the second defendant is entitled to a costs order against the first defendant or the estate' 'Whether costs incurred in seeking leave to apply for family provision relief are recoverable']

Ratio Decidendi

The second defendant was not entitled to a costs order, as she had only filed a submitting appearance, was not required to participate in the main proceedings, and the costs she incurred were either for her own legal advice or related to an unprosecuted application. No substantive relief was sought by or against her, and her application for costs lacked a proper basis.

Court Disposition

Second defendant's application for orders for her costs of the proceedings is dismissed.

Orders

  • ["The second defendant's application for orders for her costs of the proceedings is dismissed."]