Hoque v ARZ Building & Constructions Pty Ltd [2017] NSWCATAP 182

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Hoque v ARZ Building & Constructions Pty Ltd [2017] NSWCATAP 182 Hearing dates: On the papers, submission filed 6 June 2017 Date of orders: 05 September 2017 Decision date: 05 September 2017 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel Before: J Harris SC, Senior Member Dr J Renwick SC, Senior Member Decision: 1. Each party is to pay its own costs of 13 May 2016.

2. Otherwise, the respondent is to pay the appellants' costs of the appeal. Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 Cases Cited: Allen v TriCare (Hastings) Ltd [2017] NSWCATAP 25 IPM Pty Ltd v consumer Trader & Tenancy Tribunal [2008] NSWSC 130 Markinsky v Zammit [2016] NSWCATAP 253 TAG Aviation Pty Ltd v Kirk [2017] NSWCATAP 41 Category: Costs Parties: Kazi Emdadul Hoque and Mossammat Nazmun Nahar (Appellants) ARZ Building & Constructions Pty Ltd (Respondents) Representation: Solicitors: Meehans Solicitors (Appellants) Kioussis Lawyers (Respondents) File Number(s): AP 16/11843

Reasons for decision 1. In this matter the Appeal Panel delivered its decision on 29 March 2017 cited as [2017] NSWCATAP 71. The appeal was allowed. The decisions of the Tribunal were set aside and the matters were remitted to the Commercial and Consumer Division of the Tribunal for reconsideration according to law. The parties were ordered to confer as to the costs of the appeal. The appeal panel further ordered that in the event of no agreement as to costs orders on the appeal, submissions as to costs (which are not to exceed 5 pages) may be filed and served within a further 14 days. 2. On 27 April 2017 the solicitors for the appellants wrote advising that the parties "have been unable to meet (sic) an agreement on costs" and forwarded submissions on costs. Unfortunately, those submissions were filed by the solicitors for the appellants in the Commercial and Consumer Division of the Tribunal rather than with the Appeal Panel. They did not find their way to the Appeal Panel until 6 June 2017. No submission has been filed by the respondent.