Martin v Amaca Pty Limited (No. 2) [2017] NSWDDT 11

Dust Diseases Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Martin v Amaca Pty Limited (No. 2) [2017] NSWDDT 11 Hearing dates: 3 November 2017 Date of orders: 10 November 2017 Decision date: 10 November 2017 Before: Judge D. Russell Decision: 1. Dismiss the defendant's application to vary the costs order made on 15 September 2017.

2. Order the defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs of and incidental to the defendant's application for a variation of the costs order made on 15 September 2017. Catchwords: COSTS – application for variation of primary costs order – whether defendant should pay plaintiff's costs of evidence by a forensic accountant – some assumptions made by the accountant not established by evidence – some conclusions of accountant not accepted Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 Cases Cited: Martin v Amaca Pty Limited [2017] NSWDDT 8 Category: Costs Parties: Karen Martin (plaintiff) Amaca Pty Limited (defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr S. Tzouganatos (plaintiff) Mr J. Sheller (defendant)

Solicitors:

Turner Freeman (plaintiff) Mills Oakley (defendant) File Number(s): 28/2017

Judgment 1. Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant for $472,586 was delivered on 15 September 2017 – Martin v Amaca Pty Limited [2017] NSWDDT 8. The defendant was ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs. Liberty was granted to apply if any different costs order was sought by either party. 2. The matter was listed again on 3 November 2017 at which time the defendant sought a different costs order. No explanation was provided as to why it took the defendant seven weeks to bring the matter back before the court to seek a different costs order. It is unsatisfactory that the costs issue remained in abeyance for so long. In future, my judgments will grant seven days only for a party to apply for a different costs order.