Tanious v Australian Medical Council Limited and ; Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (No 2) [2015] NSWSC 456

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Tanious v Australian Medical Council Limited and ; Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (No 2) [2015] NSWSC 456 Hearing dates: 22 April 2015 Date of orders: 22 April 2015 Decision date: 22 April 2015 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Bellew J Decision: The plaintiff is to pay the costs of the proceedings of the first defendant, as agreed or assessed. The plaintiff is to pay the costs of the proceedings of the second defendant on an indemnity basis. Catchwords: COSTS – Where proceedings dismissed – Where defendant had written to plaintiff pointing out the shortcomings in his case and had invited him to discontinue the proceedings with no orders as to costs – Where plaintiff continued proceedings – Indemnity costs awarded in favour of second defendant Legislation Cited: Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) Cases Cited: Birch v National Australia Bank Ltd (No 6) [2014] NSWSC 1111 Colgate Palmolive v Cussons Pty Limited [1993] 46 FCR 225 Fountain Meat (Sales) Pty Limited v International Produce Merchants Pty Limited and Anor (1988) 81 ALR 397 Malouf v Malouf (2006) 65 NSWLR 449 Tanious v Australian Medical Council Limited and Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency [2015] NSWSC 447 Tanious v Dedousis (No 2) [2014] NSWSC 1361 Tanious v Hunt [2012] NSWCA 51 Category: Costs Parties: Mofeed Louis Tanious – Plaintiff Australian Medical Council Limited – First Defendant Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency – Second Defendant Representation: Counsel: Plaintiff – In person Mr N J Topfer (Solicitor) – First Defendant Ms E Raper – Second Defendant