Young v Kruger [2012] NSWSC 628

Young v Kruger [2012] NSWSC 628

Leave to appeal was refused because the plaintiffs did not show that the Local Court costs order involved an error of principle, manifest error, sufficient doubt warranting appellate reconsideration, or reasonably clear injustice. The Magistrate was found to have taken the Calderbank offer into account, although not specifically referring to it in the extempore costs judgment, and was not obliged to determine costs in accordance with that offer. The Magistrate applied the correct principle that costs generally follow the event unless another order should be made, and it was open to order that each party pay its own costs given the disproportion between costs and the amount claimed, the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Local Court Concerning Costs Order / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused and summons dismissed.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal From Local Court Costs Order' 'costs Discretion' 'calderbank Offer' 'unfair Preference Recovery Proceedings' 'proportionality of Costs']
['civil Procedure' 'costs' 'corporations and Insolvency'] ['leave to Appeal From Local Court Costs Order' 'costs Discretion' 'calderbank Offer' 'unfair Preference Recovery Proceedings' 'proportionality of 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

Appeal From Local Court Concerning Costs Order / Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to appeal from the Local Court costs order.' "Whether the Magistrate failed to consider the plaintiffs' written Calderbank offer dated 12 August 2010." 'Whether the Magistrate acted on an error of principle in departing from the general principle that costs follow the event.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the plaintiffs did not show that the Local Court costs order involved an error of principle, manifest error, sufficient doubt warranting appellate reconsideration, or reasonably clear injustice. The Magistrate was found to have taken the Calderbank offer into account, although not specifically referring to it in the extempore costs judgment, and was not obliged to determine costs in accordance with that offer. The Magistrate applied the correct principle that costs generally follow the event unless another order should be made, and it was open to order that each party pay its own costs given the disproportion between costs and the amount claimed, the...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused and summons dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is not granted.' 'The summons filed 4 November 2011 is dismissed.' "The plaintiffs are to pay the defendant's costs as agreed or assessed."]