NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Whyked Pty Limited v Yahoo!7 Pty Limited [2008] NSWSC 477 This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the judgment for a list of the amendments.
HEARING DATE(S) : 18 April 2008 and 21 April 2008
JUDGMENT DATE : 2 June 2008
JUDGMENT OF : McDougall J at 1
DECISION : See paragraphs [188] and [189] of the judgment.
CATCHWORDS : COSTS – indemnity costs – costs orders against legal practitioner – whether serious neglect, serious incompetence or serious misconduct – reasonable prospects of success – s99 Civil Procedure Act 2005 – r42.3 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules.
Civil Procedure Act 2005 English Supreme Court Act 1981 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 LEGISLATION CITED : Federal Court Rules 1979 Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) Legal Profession Act 2004 Trade Practices Act 1974 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005
CATEGORY : Principal judgment
Darlington Futures Ltd v Delco Australia Pty Ltd (1986) 161 CLR 500 Degiorgio v Dunn (No.2) (2000) 62 NSWLR 284 Farah Constructions Pty Ltd v Say-Dee Pty Ltd (2007) 81 ALJR 1107 General Steel Industries v Commissioner for Railways (1964) 112 CLR 125 Harley v McDonald [1999] 3 NZLR 545 H & E Van der Sterren v Cibernetics (Holdings) Pty Ltd (1970) 44 ALJR 157 Ideal Waterproofing Pty Ltd v Buildcorp Australia Pty Ltd [2006] NSWSC 155 In the matter of Bauhaus Pyrmont Pty Ltd (in liq) (2006) 67 NSWLR 289 Karwal v Skrzypczak [2007] NSWSC 931 Knight v FP Special Assets Limited (1992) 174 CLR 178 CASES CITED : Lemoto v Able Technical Pty Ltd (2005) 63 NSWLR 300 Levick v Commissioner of Taxation (2000) 102 FCR 155 National Mutual Property Services (Australia) Pty Ltd v Citibank Savings Ltd (1995) 132 ALR 514 Poulton v The Commonwealth (1953) 89 CLR 540 Radaich v Smith (1959) 101 CLR 209 Rickard Constructions v Rickard Hails Moretti [2004] NSWSC 1041 Rickard Constructions v Rickard Hails Moretti Pty Ltd [2006] NSWCA 356 Ridehalgh v Horsefield [1994] Ch 205 Robinson v Harman ((1848) 1 Ex 850; 154 ER 363 White Industries (Qld) Pty Ltd v Flower and Hart (a firm) (1998) 156 ALR 169 Whyked Pty Limited t/as Ezysend v Yahoo Australia and New Zealand Pty Limited [2006] NSWSC 650
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