6 Oct 2021
Given no party was comprehensively successful and the family context, the discretionary position is that costs should lie where they fell; applicants' reliance on unaccepted settlement offers did not justify an award of 2B costs because the judgment did not give the returns sought in those offers.
24 Jun 2010
Court ordered specific performance under clause 17(d) requiring all parties to cooperate to facilitate and complete the orderly sale of the property and joint venture assets; court declined to determine on summary judgment whether the October 2008 payments of $177,245.64 were capital contributions, finding that issue requires trial; no order for further contributions to marketing costs because joint venture funds were available; leave reserved for further directions and supervision; costs reserved.