NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Appeal
CITATION: Su v So; Verekers Lawyers v So (No 2) [2010] NSWCA 303
HEARING DATE(S): On the papers
JUDGMENT DATE: 12 November 2010
JUDGMENT OF: Allsop P at 1; Tobias JA at 16; Sackville AJA at 17
DECISION: 1. Decline to vary the orders made on 27 May 2010 as to the position between Mr Su and Mr So. 2. Decline to vary or add to the orders made on 27 May as to the position between Mr So and Verekers with the consequence that each is to pay his own costs of the proceedings below and the appeal.
CATCHWORDS: COSTS - varying judgment or orders
CATEGORY: Consequential orders
Donald v Campbell & Co Ltd v Pollak [1927] AC 732 CASES CITED: MacDougall v Curlevski (1996) 40 NSWLR 430 Ritter v Godfrey [1920] 2 KB 47 Su v So; Verekers Lawyers v So [2010] NSWCA 119
Jian Ji Su (Applicant) PARTIES: Verekers Lawyers (Second Applicant) Hip Tong So (Respondent)
FILE NUMBER(S): CA 2009/298342; 2009/298356
Mr M L D Einfeld QC, Mr P T Newton (Applicant) COUNSEL: Mr S Philips (Second Applicant) Mr J Garnsey SC, Mr C Moschoudis (Respondent)
Heidtman & Co Lawyers (Applicant) SOLICITORS: Verekers Lawyers (Second Applicant) David Kam & Co Solicitors (Respondent)
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 1033/2007
LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Elkaim DCJ
LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION: 25 May 2009
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL 2009/298342 2009/298356
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