New South Wales Court of Appeal CITATION: Richards v Cornford (No 2) [2010] NSWCA 112 HEARING DATE(S): 5 May 2010 JUDGMENT DATE: 14 May 2010 JUDGMENT OF: Allsop P at 1; Basten JA at 1 DECISION: Order that order 3 made on 10 May 2010 be varied by replacing the word "respondents" with the words "third respondent" such that order (3) made on 10 May 2010 and varied today will now read: "Order that the third respondent pay the appellant's costs of the appeal." LEGISLATION CITED: Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 46(1)(a) CATEGORY: Consequential orders Danielle Richards (Appellant) PARTIES: Ian Cornford (First Respondent) Taringha House Pty Ltd (Second Respondent) QBE Insurance (Australia) Ltd (Third Respondent) FILE NUMBER(S): CA 2009/298373 Ms S Norton SC, Mr M Daley (Appellant) COUNSEL: Mr J E Rowe (First and Second Respondents) Mr S G Campbell SC, Mr J G Stewart (Third Respondents) Brydens Law Office (Appellant) SOLICITORS: John Carmody & Co (First and Second Respondents) A R Connolly & Company (Third Respondent) LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 4344/2005 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Murrell DCJ LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION: 7 May 2009 LOWER COURT MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: Richards v Cornford [2009] NSWDC 60 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL 2009/298373 ALLSOP P BASTEN JA Friday 14 May 2010 RICHARDS v CORNFORD (No 2) Judgment 1 ALLSOP P and BASTEN JA: On 10 May 2010, the Court made orders and published reasons in this appeal: [2010] NSWCA 99. The order for costs which was made was that the respondents pay the appellant's costs of the appeal. This was in accordance with how the written submissions had been framed. However, the first and second respondents had not taken any active part in the appeal. The parties are agreed that the party responsible for the appellant's costs is the third respondent (QBE). Therefore, by consent, the orders of the Court made on 10 May 2010 will be amended under the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 46(1)(a) as follows: Order that order 3 made on 10 May 2010 be varied by replacing the word "respondents" with the words "third respondent" such that order (3) made on 10 May 2010 and varied today will now read: "Order that the third respondent pay the appellant's costs of the appeal." ********** DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.