Christopher L Jones and Brigitte Letzbor v Rod Dempsey [2014] NSWCATCD 178

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Christopher L Jones and Brigitte Letzbor v Rod Dempsey [2014] NSWCATCD 178 Hearing dates: On the papers Decision date: 18 September 2014 Before: S F Smith, General Member Decision: 1. Interlocutory application dismissed. Catchwords: Cost; 'special circumstances' Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Cases Cited: Megna v Marshall [2005] NSWSC 1326; Fiduciary Ltd v Morningstar Research Pty Ltd (2002) NSWLR 1 Texts Cited: None Category: Principal judgment Parties: Christopher L Jones and Brigitte Letzbor (applicants) Rod Dempsey (respondent Representation: None Panwar Legal of Terrigial for applicants; Messrs Elsworthy, The Junction for respondent File Number(s): HB 13/29738 Publication restriction: Unrestricted

reasons for decision

APPLICATION 1This was an application for interlocutory orders in favour of the respondent for costs in a home building matter filed on 28 May 2013. As filed the application sought compensation of some of $268,000 for alleged defects in a dwelling house in Terrigal. The home had been built by the respondent on an owner builder's permit. Most of the alleged defects seem to relate to water proofing issues.

HISTORY 2The matter had been listed for directions on seven (7) occasions by telephone or otherwise between later June 2013 and the end of August 2014. 3Mr Dempsey works in PNG and has often been out of the country. Early in the piece the applicants were represented and the respondent was not. However in August 2013 the instructions of the applicants' solicitor ceased but in March 2014 they instructed new legal advisors who still act. 4Also in about March 2014 the respondent instructed solicitors. 5On 4 June 2014 there was a hearing before Senior Member Vrabac. I discern from the file that several matters were discussed including a conclave of experts and that the respondent's solicitor foreshadowed an application for cost thrown away by the way the way the applicants had conducted their case. 6The learned Senior Member ordered that the parties file written submissions on the costs question which both of them did. Consequently the matter came on for determination before me on 29 August 2014.