Washington Gray v Johannes Toroian & Ors [2003] NSWSC 763

Washington Gray v Johannes Toroian & Ors [2003] NSWSC 763

The Tribunal's costs order was an exercise of discretion properly supported by the evidence, findings, and statutory framework; there was no error of law or procedural unfairness established by the plaintiff, and so the appeal on costs failed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 August 2003
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['costs' 'contract' 'home Building' 'tribunal Procedure']
['administrative Law' 'construction Law'] ['costs' 'contract' 'home Building' 'tribunal Procedure']

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 / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Tribunal's costs order involved an error of law as to discretion, reasoning, or evidence" 'Whether the Tribunal exercised its discretion regarding costs properly under Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Regulation 2002, cl 20 (4)' 'Whether the reasons for the costs order satisfied statutory requirements (s 49 (3)(c))']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal's costs order was an exercise of discretion properly supported by the evidence, findings, and statutory framework; there was no error of law or procedural unfairness established by the plaintiff, and so the appeal on costs failed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['I dismiss the Summons.' 'The plaintiff is to pay the costs of the Summons.' 'The Exhibits may be returned.']