The Owners - Strata Plan No 84741 v Nazero Constructions Pty Limited & Ors (Costs) [2016] NSWSC 965

The Owners - Strata Plan No 84741 v Nazero Constructions Pty Limited & Ors (Costs) [2016] NSWSC 965

Mr Younan was the moving party on the Notice of Motion for separate questions, assumed the inherent costs risks of that process, and was ultimately unsuccessful when the separate question was answered against him. The plaintiff and Iris were successful parties, the plaintiff had a real interest in the outcome and made appropriate helpful submissions, and much of the preparation concerning the vacated questions was also relevant to the separate question that was determined. The just result was therefore that Mr Younan pay the plaintiff's and Iris's costs without any reduction.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Costs in Equity Technology and Construction List Proceedings Concerning Determination of Separate Questions / Costs Determined on the Papers After Hearing and Determination of a Separate Question
Outcome
Costs awarded against the cross-defendant, Wardy Younan, in favour of the plaintiff and the cross-claimant without reduction.
Legal Topics
['costs Following the Event' 'separate Questions' 'discretionary Costs Orders' 'construction of Deed of Variation and Release']
['civil Procedure' 'costs' 'technology and Construction'] ['costs Following the Event' 'separate Questions' 'discretionary Costs Orders' 'construction of Deed of Variation and Release']

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 in Equity Technology and Construction List Proceedings Concerning Determination of Separate Questions / Costs Determined on the Papers After Hearing and Determination of a Separate Question

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff and Iris, as successful parties on the separate question, should have their costs of and incidental to the Notice of Motion and hearing on 31 May 2016.' "Whether Iris's costs should be reduced by 50% because the number of separate questions was reduced at the hearing." 'Whether the plaintiff should bear its own costs because it was not a party to the Deed of variation and release and allegedly made no useful submissions.']

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Younan was the moving party on the Notice of Motion for separate questions, assumed the inherent costs risks of that process, and was ultimately unsuccessful when the separate question was answered against him. The plaintiff and Iris were successful parties, the plaintiff had a real interest in the outcome and made appropriate helpful submissions, and much of the preparation concerning the vacated questions was also relevant to the separate question that was determined. The just result was therefore that Mr Younan pay the plaintiff's and Iris's costs without any reduction.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded against the cross-defendant, Wardy Younan, in favour of the plaintiff and the cross-claimant without reduction.

Orders

  • ['The cross-defendant, Wardy Younan, is to pay the costs of the cross-claimant, Iris Diversified Property Pty Limited, and the plaintiff, The Owners – Strata Plan No 84741, of and incidental to the Notice of Motion for the determination of the separate questions and the hearing on 31 May 2016.']