Huang v Muse Beauty Salon Waterloo Pty Ltd (No 6); Muse Beauty Salon Waterloo Pty Ltd v Huang (No 6) [2022] NSWDC 344

Huang v Muse Beauty Salon Waterloo Pty Ltd (No 6); Muse Beauty Salon Waterloo Pty Ltd v Huang (No 6) [2022] NSWDC 344

The application by the Huang interests to vary the 60% costs order made on 6 July 2022 is rejected, as the orders were clear, the discretion as to costs was properly exercised, and the costs percentage reflects the outcomes achieved by each party in the applications.

Parties
Plaintiff: Yi-Ching Huang; First Defendant: Muse Beauty Salon Waterloo Pty Ltd; Second Defendant: Kailing Xie; Third Defendant: Yuling Bai; First Plaintiff: Muse Beauty Salon Waterloo Pty Ltd; Second Plaintiff: Kailing Xie; Third Plaintiff: Yuling Bai; Fourth Plaintiff: The Muse Beauty Salon Pty Ltd; First Defendant: Yi-Ching Huang; Second Defendant: Yew Mun Nam
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 August 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Applications for Variation of Costs Order / Post Judgment Application for Variation of Costs Orders
Outcome
Application to vary costs order rejected; original costs order confirmed
Legal Topics
Costs, Costs Discretion, Variation of Costs Orders
Civil Procedure Costs Costs Discretion Variation of Costs Orders

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yi-Ching Huang

Plaintiff

Muse Beauty Salon Waterloo Pty Ltd

First Defendant

Kailing Xie

Second Defendant

Yuling Bai

Third Defendant

Muse Beauty Salon Waterloo Pty Ltd

First Plaintiff

Kailing Xie

Second Plaintiff

Yuling Bai

Third Plaintiff

The Muse Beauty Salon Pty Ltd

Fourth Plaintiff

Yi-Ching Huang

First Defendant

Yew Mun Nam

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Applications for Variation of Costs Order / Post Judgment Application for Variation of Costs Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the orders made on 6 July 2022 regarding costs were ambiguous and should be varied
  2. 2 Whether the 60% costs order in favour of the Xie interests was disproportionate or inappropriate
  3. 3 Whether the exercise of the Court's costs discretion had miscarried

Ratio Decidendi

The application by the Huang interests to vary the 60% costs order made on 6 July 2022 is rejected, as the orders were clear, the discretion as to costs was properly exercised, and the costs percentage reflects the outcomes achieved by each party in the applications.

Court Disposition

Application to vary costs order rejected; original costs order confirmed

Orders

  • The application by the Huang interests to vary Order 4 made on 6 July 2022 is rejected.
  • The Huang interests are to pay the costs of the Xie interests of the application to vary Order 4 as agreed or assessed.