31 Mar 2020
Costs were reserved because the plaintiffs' success at the first stage may not translate into meaningful recovery after the second stage; given the uncertainty about quantum and the potential that plaintiffs will not achieve more than limited success, it is premature to make a costs order now and the discretion favours reserving costs until the second stage is resolved.
17 Sept 2007
Finzsoft failed to demonstrate legal or factual grounds to strike out the plaintiff's statement of claim or to obtain summary judgment; Clause 15 restricts recoverable heads of damages but does not nullify causes of action absent evidence and proper construction at trial; Clause 6(a) does not remove Finance Now's right to require Finzsoft to prove copyright ownership; there is insufficient justification to order split trials or defer discovery at this interlocutory stage; disputed issues of construction and fact must be resolved at trial.
17 Nov 2005
Severance was refused because quantum evidence was short, there was real overlap between liability and quantum (risking duplication and credibility findings), and a significant risk of delay and appeals; adjournment was refused because the application was late, sufficient material to calculate damages had been discovered, the benefit of non-party discovery was speculative, and the plaintiff had not established necessity; costs awarded to defendant on a 2B basis.