Strata Consolidated v Bradshaw [1999] NSWSC 102

Strata Consolidated v Bradshaw [1999] NSWSC 102

Where litigation involves multiple parties and mixed results, with most issues determined in favour of the defendants (particularly on major allegations), it is appropriate to order the plaintiffs to pay the majority of the successful defendants’ costs (with different percentages reflecting relative success), and to subsume prior costs orders in a final, global apportionment, avoiding the arbitrary or onerous task of issue-by-issue assessment.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 February 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Judgment, Costs Order
Outcome
Costs orders: Plaintiffs to pay 90% of 1st and 2nd defendants' costs and 40% of costs of 3rd, 5th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, and 11th defendants; prior cost orders 2G and 2J subsumed; stay of orders pending costs assessment.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'fiduciary Duty' 'passing Off' 'trade Practices' 'proportionate Costs Orders']
['equity' 'commercial Law'] ['costs' 'fiduciary Duty' 'passing Off' 'trade Practices' 'proportionate Costs Orders']

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

Civil / Post Judgment, Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['How should costs be apportioned between multiple parties with mixed success in complex proceedings?' 'What is the proper approach to costs where breach of fiduciary duty occurs but causes no loss?' 'How are costs orders under supplementary judgments to be subsumed in final costs orders?']

Ratio Decidendi

Where litigation involves multiple parties and mixed results, with most issues determined in favour of the defendants (particularly on major allegations), it is appropriate to order the plaintiffs to pay the majority of the successful defendants’ costs (with different percentages reflecting relative success), and to subsume prior costs orders in a final, global apportionment, avoiding the arbitrary or onerous task of issue-by-issue assessment.

Court Disposition

Costs orders: Plaintiffs to pay 90% of 1st and 2nd defendants' costs and 40% of costs of 3rd, 5th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, and 11th defendants; prior cost orders 2G and 2J subsumed; stay of orders pending costs assessment.

Orders

  • ["Plaintiffs to pay 90% of 1st and 2nd defendants' costs." "Plaintiffs to pay 40% of 3rd, 5th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, and 11th defendants' costs." 'Costs orders 2G and 2J of supplementary judgment of 24 April 1998 are subsumed.' 'Stay of other orders in proceedings (except assessment of costs) until assessment of, or...