Khoury v The Owners – Strata Plan No 4115 [2020] NSWCATAP 241

Khoury v The Owners – Strata Plan No 4115 [2020] NSWCATAP 241

The SDA and ACE invoices were not the appellants' costs of the proceedings because the appellants did not retain SDA or ACE for the purposes of the proceedings. Even if the invoices were disbursements incurred for the purposes of the proceedings, they were or appeared to be the respondent's costs, and payment from funds originally provided by the appellants under Special By-Law 10 did not make them the appellants' costs. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Costs Decision of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal, Consumer and Commercial Division / Appeal Panel
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['party/party Costs' 'disbursements' 'special Circumstances for Costs in Ncat' 'strata Manager Trust Account' 'special by Law Expenses']
['costs' 'strata Schemes' 'civil Procedure'] ['party/party Costs' 'disbursements' 'special Circumstances for Costs in Ncat' 'strata Manager Trust Account' 'special by Law Expenses']

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 Costs Decision of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal, Consumer and Commercial Division / Appeal Panel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether invoices for SDA and ACE paid from funds deposited by the appellants into the strata manager's trust account were the appellants' costs of the proceedings." 'Whether disbursements of professional advisers engaged by the respondent could be recovered by the appellants as costs under s 60 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW).' 'Whether the Tribunal erred in finding no special circumstances warranting an award of costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

The SDA and ACE invoices were not the appellants' costs of the proceedings because the appellants did not retain SDA or ACE for the purposes of the proceedings. Even if the invoices were disbursements incurred for the purposes of the proceedings, they were or appeared to be the respondent's costs, and payment from funds originally provided by the appellants under Special By-Law 10 did not make them the appellants' costs. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed.']