NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Yun Hee Choi v City of Sydney Council & 4 others [2007] NSWSC 65
HEARING DATE(S) : 11 October 2006 - 7 November 2006
JUDGMENT DATE : 13 March 2007
JUDGMENT OF : Barr J at 1
DECISION : In the plaintiff's claim - 1. A verdict for the first defendant, City of Sydney Council, in the claim of the plaintiff, Yun Hee Choi. 2. A verdict for the plaintiff, Yun Hee Choi, against the second defendant, Prestige Property Services Pty Limited, in the sum of $718,259.95. Interest is not to run until 21 days after the second defendant has received from the plaintiff a completed Health Insurance Commission form and a Centrelink clearance. 3. The plaintiff is to pay the first defendant's costs and the second defendant is to indemnify her. The second defendant is to pay the plaintiff's costs of suit against both defendants. In the first cross-claim - 4. A verdict for the first cross-defendant, Prestige Property Services Pty Limited. 5. I make no order as to costs. In the second cross-claim - 6. A verdict for the first cross-defendant, Active Tree Services Pty Limited. 7. I order the cross-claimant, Prestige Property Services Pty Limited, to pay the costs of the first cross-defendant, Active Tree Services Pty Limited, on an indemnity basis. 8. A verdict for the second cross-defendant, City of Sydney Council. 9. I order the cross-claimant, Prestige Property Services Pty Limited, to pay the costs of the second cross-defendant, City of Sydney Council. In the third cross-claim - 10. A verdict for the first cross-defendant, P Matson on behalf of the Underwriting Members of Syndicate 990. 11. I order the third cross-claimant, Active Tree Services Pty Limited, to pay the costs of the first cross-defendant, P Matson on behalf of the Underwriting Members of Syndicate 990. Those costs are to be assessed on a party-party basis up to 5pm on 22 March 2006 and thereafter on an indemnity basis. 12. A verdict for the second cross-defendant, City of Sydney Council. 13. I make no order as to the costs of Active Tree Services Pty Limited and City of Sydney Council. 14. A verdict for the third cross-defendant, Prestige Property Services Pty Limited. 15. I make no order as to the costs of Active Tree Services Pty Limited and Prestige Property Services Pty Limited.
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