Belflora Pty Ltd v Vinflora Pty Ltd (No 2) - [2021] NSWCA 205

Court of Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Belflora Pty Ltd v Vinflora Pty Ltd (No 2) [2021] NSWCA 205
Hearing dates: 2 June 2021
Decision date: 08 September 2021
Before: Bathurst CJ; Brereton JA; Emmett AJA
Decision:
The appellant pay the respondent’s costs of the appeal.

Catchwords:
COSTS – party/party – general rule that costs follow the event

Legislation Cited:
Nil

Cases Cited:
Nil

Texts Cited:
Nil

Category: Costs
Parties: Belflora Pty Ltd (Appellant)
Vinflora Pty Ltd (First Respondent)
Vamsi Nagendra Babu Uppalapti (Second Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
B Coles QC with D Allen (Appellant)
A Moses QC with J Simpkins (Respondents)
Solicitors:
Russo & Partners Pty Ltd (Appellant)
Frank Law (Respondents)

File Number(s): 2020/306310
Publication restriction: Nil
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

Supreme Court

Jurisdiction:

Equity

Citation:

[2020] NSWSC 1229

Date of Decision:

10 September 2020

Before:

Sackar J

File Number(s):

2019/383473

Judgment

THE COURT: Judgment in this appeal was handed down on 19 August 2021. A direction was made that the parties within seven days make submissions as to the appropriate order of the costs of the appeal.
This order was made because the respondent in its written submissions indicated an intention to seek a special costs order if successful.
However, the submissions now received from each party indicate that the appropriate order is that the appellant pay the respondent’s costs of the appeal. In those circumstances, the Court orders the appellant pay the respondent’s costs of the appeal.

**********

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Belflora Pty Ltd v Vinflora Pty Ltd (No 2) and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2021] NSWCA 205
Decision Date: 08 September 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Belflora Pty Ltd v Vinflora Pty Ltd (No 2)*, the dispute concerned the costs of an appeal before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales. The appeal itself had been dismissed, and the primary issue before the court was the appropriate order for costs.

The court was required to determine whether the general rule that costs follow the event should apply in this instance, notwithstanding any specific circumstances that might warrant a departure from that rule.

The court applied the well-established principle that, in the absence of any reason to the contrary, the unsuccessful party to an appeal should bear the costs of the successful party. The court found no exceptional circumstances to justify deviating from this general rule.

Consequently, the court ordered that the appellant pay the respondent’s costs of the appeal.

Orders

Orders of the court

The appellant pay the respondent’s costs of the appeal.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Belflora Pty Ltd v Vinflora Pty Ltd (No 2) [2021] NSWCA 205
Hearing dates:	2 June 2021
Decision date:	08 September 2021
Before:	Bathurst CJ; Brereton JA; Emmett AJA
Decision:	The appellant pay the respondent’s costs of the appeal.
Catchwords:	COSTS – party/party – general rule that costs follow the event
Legislation Cited:	Nil
Cases Cited:	Nil
Texts Cited:	Nil
Category:	Costs
Parties:	Belflora Pty Ltd (Appellant) Vinflora Pty Ltd (First Respondent) Vamsi Nagendra Babu Uppalapti (Second Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: B Coles QC with D Allen (Appellant) A Moses QC with J Simpkins (Respondents) Solicitors: Russo & Partners Pty Ltd (Appellant) Frank Law (Respondents)
File Number(s):	2020/306310
Publication restriction:	Nil
Decision under appeal	Court or tribunal: Supreme Court Jurisdiction: Equity Citation: [2020] NSWSC 1229 Date of Decision: 10 September 2020 Before: Sackar J File Number(s): 2019/383473