NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Real Estate Property Management Pty Ltd & Ors v WaterCorp Investments Pty Ltd [2018] NSWCA 194 Hearing dates: 23 August 2018 Decision date: 03 September 2018 Before: Basten JA at [47]; White JA at [1] Decision: (1) To the extent necessary, extend the time for filing of the application for leave to appeal to the date of the filing of the summons seeking leave to appeal. (2) Order that the summons seeking leave to appeal be dismissed with costs. Catchwords: APPEAL – application by defendants for leave to appeal against costs orders made against them – where plaintiff succeeded at first instance – where plaintiff succeeded on only one of the issues raised by its claim but defendants succeeded on majority of issues – where primary judge held that issues on which plaintiff had failed were not dominant or separable – where primary judge held that unmeritorious claims raised by the plaintiff had not materially increased costs – where plaintiff was joined to proceedings between other parties and awarded costs in respect of those proceedings – where error in the exercise of discretion was not more than merely arguable – where costs of appeal on costs would be significant – leave refused Legislation Cited: District Court Act 1973 (NSW), s 127 Cases Cited: Be Financial Pty Ltd (as trustee for Be Financial Operations Trust) v Das [2012] NSWCA 164 Bostik Australia Pty Ltd v Liddiard (No. 2) [2009] NSWCA 304 Carolan v AMF Bowling Pty Ltd [1995] NSWCA 69 Griffith v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (No. 2) [2011] NSWCA 145 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 HP Mercantile Pty Ltd v Dierickx & Ors (No. 2) [2012] NSWSC 1430 McLaughlin v Dungowan Manly Pty Ltd [2010] NSWSC 306 Sze Tu v Lowe (No. 2) [2015] NSWCA 91 The Age Company Ltd v Liu (2013) 82 NSWLR 268; [2013] NSWCA 26 Waters v PC Henderson (Australia) Pty Ltd [1994] NSWSC 338; (1994) 254 ALR 328 Zhang v ROC Services (NSW) Pty Ltd (2016) 93 NSWLR 561; [2016] NSWCA 370 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Real Estate Property Management Pty Ltd (1st Applicant) Starley Investments Pty Ltd (2nd Applicant) Martin David Pettit (3rd Applicant) Fadwa Pettit (4th Applicant) WaterCorp Investments Pty Ltd (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: MLC Einfeld QC with J Foley (Applicants) B Mostafa (Respondent)
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