Y Primavera v T Bakos & Anor [2019] NSWSC 1053

Y Primavera v T Bakos & Anor [2019] NSWSC 1053

Although Ms Primavera succeeded on the first and second claims, her recovery was modest, the proceedings would have been significantly shorter and less costly had they focused on larger value claims with greater attention to proportionality, and she abandoned her third claim. Ms Bakos' proposed issue-by-issue analysis was artificial and unpersuasive, and there was no basis to vacate previous costs orders. A broad percentage order requiring Ms Bakos to pay 60% of Ms Primavera's costs, except where previous costs orders applied, properly reflected the outcome and the compensatory nature of costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Costs; Equity Corporations List / Post Judgment Determination of Costs and Final Orders After Judgment on Liability
Outcome
The First Defendant was ordered to pay the Plaintiff $69,566.18, interest, and 60% of the Plaintiff's costs of the proceedings on the ordinary basis, except where costs were the subject of previous costs orders.
Legal Topics
['party/party Costs' 'percentage Apportionment of Costs' 'costs Following the Event' 'mixed Outcome in Proceedings' 'proportionality of Litigation Costs']
['civil Procedure' 'costs' 'corporations'] ['party/party Costs' 'percentage Apportionment of Costs' 'costs Following the Event' 'mixed Outcome in Proceedings' 'proportionality of Litigation 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

Costs; Equity Corporations List / Post Judgment Determination of Costs and Final Orders After Judgment on Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the First Defendant should pay a percentage of the Plaintiff's costs after the Plaintiff succeeded on two claims in modest amounts and abandoned a third claim." 'Whether costs should be apportioned on an issue-by-issue basis or by a broad percentage reduction.' 'Whether previous costs orders should be vacated.' 'Whether the proceedings were reasonably pursued in the Supreme Court notwithstanding the limited recovery achieved.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although Ms Primavera succeeded on the first and second claims, her recovery was modest, the proceedings would have been significantly shorter and less costly had they focused on larger value claims with greater attention to proportionality, and she abandoned her third claim. Ms Bakos' proposed issue-by-issue analysis was artificial and unpersuasive, and there was no basis to vacate previous costs orders. A broad percentage order requiring Ms Bakos to pay 60% of Ms Primavera's costs, except where previous costs orders applied, properly reflected the outcome and the compensatory nature of costs.

Court Disposition

The First Defendant was ordered to pay the Plaintiff $69,566.18, interest, and 60% of the Plaintiff's costs of the proceedings on the ordinary basis, except where costs were the subject of previous costs orders.

Orders

  • ['The First Defendant pay the Plaintiff the sum of $69,566.18.' 'The First Defendant pay the Plaintiff interest in the sum of $28,285 to 3 July 2019 pursuant to s 100 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) and continuing thereafter at a rate of $9.99 per day until 16 August 2019.' "Except so far as costs are the...