Rene Rivkin v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited [2002] NSWSC 587

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Rene Rivkin v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited [2002] NSWSC 587 FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 20086/98 HEARING DATE(S) : 21 June 2002 JUDGMENT DATE : 3 July 2002

PARTIES : Plaintiff: Rene Rivkin Defendant: Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited JUDGMENT OF : Cripps AJ at 1

COUNSEL : Plaintiff: BR McClintock SC & M Richardson Defendant: R Stitt QC and M Lynch SOLICITORS : Plaintiff: Gilbert and Tobin Defendant: Mallesons Stephen Jacques CATCHWORDS : Apportionment of costs - Supreme Court Rules Part 52A Rule 33 CASES CITED : John Fairfax & Sons v Palmer (1987) 8 NSWLR 297 DECISION : Defendant to pay the plaintiffs costs of proceedings

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION CRIPPS AJ

3 July 2002

20086/98 Rene Rivkin v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited

JUDGMENT: Costs 1 His Honour: The parties have agreed that interest on the verdict amounts to $12,866.91. Accordingly, I direct judgment to be entered in the sum of $162,866.91.

2 Mr Stitt QC on behalf of the defendant has applied for a stay of proceedings, it being the defendant's intention I was told, to lodge an appeal against the quantum of the judgment. I gave brief reasons why I would not grant a stay. To my understanding, the purpose of granting a stay in circumstances such as this is to ensure that a defendant appellant, if successful, will not be deprived of the fruits of victory. In these hypothetical circumstances that could happen if the difference between what I awarded and what I should have awarded will not be able to be recovered from the plaintiff. There is no evidence of there being such a problem. The judgment of this court is presumed to be correct and a stay ought not be granted unless there are circumstances warranting that course. And, in my view, none have been advanced. Accordingly the application is refused.