NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Muriti v Prendergast [2006] NSWSC 286
HEARING DATE(S) : 3 August, 2 November 2005
JUDGMENT DATE : 12 April 2006
JUDGMENT OF : Burchett AJ at 1
DECISION : Orders made for costs on the indemnity basis and costs on the party and party basis and orders made for interest on costs as stated in the judgment.
CATCHWORDS : COSTS - circumstances justifying an order for indemnity costs - circumstances justifying an order for interest on costs - terms of appropriate order for interest on costs.
Civil Procedure Act 2005, s 101(4), (5) LEGISLATION CITED : Supreme Court Act 1970, s 95(4) Uniform Rules
Harrison v Schipp [2001] NSWCA 13 Lahoud v Lahoud [2006] NSWSC 126 CASES CITED : Oshlack v Richmond River Council (1998) 193 CLR 72 Muriti v Prendergast [2005]NSWSC 526 Rosniak v Government Insurance Office (1997) 41 NSWLR 608
Vincent Carl Muriti (First Plaintiff) Keanlong Pty Limited (Second Plaintiff) PARTIES : John Francis Prendergast (First Defendant) Rolcross Pty Ltd (Second Defendant) Worthbrook Pty Ltd (Third Defendant)
FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 5094/04; 2271/05; 2883/05; 2889/05; 4395/05
COUNSEL : Mr J W J Stevenson SC/ Mr G Curtin for Applicants Mr C R Newlinds SC/Mr P E Newton (on 3 August 2005) and Ms J A D Needham SC (on 2 November 2005) for Respondents
SOLICITORS : Henry Davis York for Applicants Levitt Robinson (Phillips Fox and others previously) for Respondents
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES EQUITY DIVISION
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate