Queanbeyan Leagues Club Ltd v Poldune Pty Ltd [2001] NSWSC 934

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Queanbeyan Leagues Club Ltd v Poldune Pty Ltd [2001] NSWSC 934 CURRENT JURISDICTION: Equity FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 3418/96 HEARING DATE(S) : 18 October 2001 JUDGMENT DATE : 18 October 2001

Queanbeyan Leagues Club Limited (P) GIO Australia Holdings Limited (D2) PARTIES : M J Armstrong (D14) GIO Personal Investment Services Limited (D15) Marshall Marks Kennedy (XD1) JUDGMENT OF : Hamilton J

P M Donohoe QC & A Radojev (P) COUNSEL : M J Slattery QC & R Pepper (D2 & 15) I Bailey (D14) D L Davies SC & M T McCulloch (XD1) Collaery & Colquhoun (P) SOLICITORS : Barker Gosling (D2 & 15) Tress Cocks & Maddox (D14) Phillips Fox (XD1) CATCHWORDS : PROCEDURE [557] - Costs - General rule - Costs follow the event - Costs of issues - Three applications involving defendants and cross defendant heard together - Issues intertwined - Two decided one way and one the other. CASES CITED : Queanbeyan Leagues Club Ltd v Poldune Pty Ltd [2001] NSWSC 898 DECISION : As among defendants and cross defendant no order as to costs. Plaintiff's costs of the applications to be the plaintiff's costs in the proceedings.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES EQUITY DIVISION

HAMILTON J

Thursday, 18 October 2001

3418/96 QUEANBEYAN LEAGUES CLUB LIMITED v POLDUNE PTY LIMITED & ORS

Judgment

1 HIS HONOUR: Submissions have been put to me on the question of costs of the two days or so of argument on applications which were determined by my most recent judgment in this matter: Queanbeyan Leagues Club Ltd v Poldune Pty Ltd [2001] NSWSC 898 ("my judgment"). There were, as appears in my judgment, three principal applications fought between the GIO and MMK. Those three applications were as to whether or not the issue of causation was closed or still open between the GIO and MMK; whether MMK should have leave further to cross examine Mr Stackpool; and whether MMK's most recent amended defence should be allowed to stand. On the first and last of these, MMK was successful. On the question of the recall of Mr Stackpool, MMK failed. In addition, Mr Slattery, of Queen's Counsel for the GIO, shortly made an application relating to the finality of decision in two other matters, namely, the issues of contributory negligence and laches and acquiescence as between the plaintiff and the defendants. Furthermore, at the end, there was some debate separately on an application relating to the amended defence of Mr Armstrong, similar to that in relation to the amended defence of MMK.