NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Galati v Deans (No 2) [2019] NSWSC 1714 Hearing dates: On the papers Date of orders: 04 December 2019 Decision date: 04 December 2019 Jurisdiction: Equity Before: Ward CJ in Eq Decision: 1. Order that the costs of and incidental to the motion filed 8 October 2019 by the first and second defendants/cross-claimants be reserved, to be determined as part of the costs orders to be made on the final determination of the substantive dispute between the parties in the proceedings. Catchwords: COSTS –Party/Party – General rule that costs follow the event – Application of the rule and discretion – costs in relation to an application seeking general access to documents produced in answer to subpoena – whether the cross-claimants in pressing part of the relief sought in the application was so unreasonable as to warrant the payment of costs forthwith – held that the appropriate costs order is that the costs of (and incidental to) the hearing of a motion should be reserved – considered fairer to the parties that the costs be determined on the final determination of the substantive dispute between the parties in the proceedings. Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), ss 56-59, 98 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 126 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), rr 42.1, 42.7(2) Cases Cited: Bostik Australia Pty Limited v Liddiard (No 2) [2009] NSWCA 304 Chaina v Alvaro Homes Pty Ltd [2008] NSWCA 353 Dodds Family Investments Pty Ltd (formerly Solar Tint Pty Ltd) v Lane Industries Pty Ltd (1993) 26 IPR 261 Galati v Deans (No 3) [2018] NSWSC 1861 Galati v Deans [2018] NSWSC 1600 Galati v Deans [2019] NSWSC 1548 James v Surf Road Nominees Pty Ltd (No 2) [2005] NSWCA 296 Macquarie International Health Clinic Pty Ltd v Sydney Local Health District (No 2) [2019] NSWSC 1492 Neal v Neal [2018] NSWSC 1356 Roache v News Group Newspapers Ltd [1998] E.M.L.R. 161 Category: Costs Parties: Robert Paton Deans (First Defendant/First Cross-Claimant) Fishbank Development Corporation Pty Limited (Second Defendant/Second Cross-Claimant) EJC Pyrmont Pty Ltd (Tenth Cross-Defendant) Representation: Counsel: P Barham (Applicants/Defendants/Cross-claimants) C Withers (Respondent/Tenth Cross-defendant)
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