BRB Modular Pty Ltd v AWX Constructions Pty Ltd (No 2)

In the case of BRB Modular Pty Ltd v AWX Constructions Pty Ltd (No 2), the applicant, BRB Modular, sought an interlocutory injunction against the first respondent, AWX Constructions, and a subsequent costs order. The application for the interlocutory injunction was successful, and costs were reserved for a later determination. The substantive proceedings were later dismissed, and the first respondent was ordered to pay the applicant's costs, excluding the reserved costs. Both parties agreed that the general principle that costs follow the event should apply, but they disagreed on what the relevant event was for the purpose of determining the reserved costs.

The central legal issue was whether the "event" for the purpose of determining the reserved costs was the granting of the interlocutory application or the dismissal of the substantive proceeding. The court had to consider the appropriate approach to determining the reserved costs in light of the parties' agreement that costs follow the event.

The court determined that the relevant "event" for the purpose of determining the reserved costs was the dismissal of the substantive proceeding, as this was the event that determined the overall outcome of the litigation. The court noted that the applicant had succeeded in the interlocutory application, but this did not necessarily mean that they should bear the costs of the reserved application. The court held that the first respondent should pay one half of the applicant's costs of and incidental to the hearing before Bond J on 22 July 2015, to be assessed on the standard basis unless otherwise agreed.

The court's decision was that the first respondent was to pay one half of the applicant's costs of and incidental to the hearing before Bond J on 22 July 2015, to be assessed on the standard basis unless otherwise agreed. The court found that the dismissal of the substantive proceeding was the relevant event for the purpose of determining the reserved costs, and that the first respondent should bear one half of the costs associated with the interlocutory application. This decision reflects the principle that costs should follow the event, and that the overall outcome of the litigation is the relevant event for the purpose of determining the reserved costs.