Chen v Ghildyal

This matter concerned an application for leave to appeal from an interlocutory judgment of the primary judge concerning costs awarded in relation to an injunction. The applicant, Chen, sought leave to appeal against the costs order made in favour of the respondent, Ghildyal.

The central legal issue before Loukas-Karlsson J was whether the primary judge had erred in their assessment of costs, specifically in relation to the principle of *uberrima fides* (utmost good faith) and whether the injunction had been improperly obtained. The applicant contended that insufficient weight had been given to the principle of *uberrima fides* and that the injunction was improperly obtained, thereby impacting the costs order.

Loukas-Karlsson J found no error in the primary judge's decision. The court determined that the primary judge had adequately considered the relevant principles, including *uberrima fides*, and had not improperly granted the injunction. Consequently, there was no basis to interfere with the costs order made at first instance.

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the application.