Hunt Leather Pty Ltd v Transport for NSW (No 5) [2024] NSWSC 776

Hunt Leather Pty Ltd v Transport for NSW (No 5) [2024] NSWSC 776

Given the plaintiffs' mixed success and the structure of the proceedings, including a distinct, severable issue (the litigation funding commission), the just outcome is a reduction in the costs payable by the defendant to the plaintiffs by 35%; the plaintiffs must pay the defendant’s costs on the litigation funding issue (common questions 10 and 11), and the defendant must pay 65% of the plaintiffs’ remaining costs.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Hunt Leather Pty Ltd; Second Plaintiff: Sophie Hunt; Third Plaintiff: Ancio Investments Pty Ltd; Fourth Plaintiff: Nicholas Zisti; Defendant: Transport for NSW
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Representative/class Action / Post Liability Determination; Costs Ruling
Outcome
Costs orders made as set out: defendant to pay 65% of plaintiffs’ costs except for common questions 10 and 11; plaintiffs to pay defendant’s costs in respect of common questions 10 and 11.
Legal Topics
Costs, Apportionment of Costs, Nuisance (public and Private), Class Actions, Litigation Funding
Civil Procedure Torts Costs Apportionment of Costs Nuisance (public and Private) Class Actions Litigation Funding

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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hunt Leather Pty Ltd

First Plaintiff

Sophie Hunt

Second Plaintiff

Ancio Investments Pty Ltd

Third Plaintiff

Nicholas Zisti

Fourth Plaintiff

Transport for NSW

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Representative/class Action / Post Liability Determination; Costs Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 How costs should be apportioned after mixed success in a representative/class action involving public and private nuisance and litigation funding claims.

Ratio Decidendi

Given the plaintiffs' mixed success and the structure of the proceedings, including a distinct, severable issue (the litigation funding commission), the just outcome is a reduction in the costs payable by the defendant to the plaintiffs by 35%; the plaintiffs must pay the defendant’s costs on the litigation funding issue (common questions 10 and 11), and the defendant must pay 65% of the plaintiffs’ remaining costs.

Court Disposition

Costs orders made as set out: defendant to pay 65% of plaintiffs’ costs except for common questions 10 and 11; plaintiffs to pay defendant’s costs in respect of common questions 10 and 11.

Orders

  • The plaintiffs are to pay the defendant's costs as agreed or assessed as arising in respect of common questions 10 and 11.
  • Except in respect of the costs arising in respect of common questions 10 and 11, the defendant is to pay 65% of the plaintiffs’ costs as agreed or assessed.