Cole and Santos (No.2)
Case
•
[2016] FCCA 2582
•17 October 2016
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Cole and Santos (No.2) [2016] FCCA 2582
[2016] FCCA 2582
17 October 2016
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In *Cole and Santos (No.2)*, the Chief Judge Pascoe considered an application for costs following earlier proceedings between the parties. The specific nature of the dispute that led to the initial proceedings is not detailed in the provided text, but the present application concerned the allocation of legal expenses.
The central legal issue before the court was whether any orders for costs should be made in favour of either party. This required the court to consider the general principles governing the award of costs in litigation, including the discretion vested in the court to depart from the usual rule that costs follow the event.
The court exercised its discretion and determined that no orders as to costs should be made. This indicates that neither party was successful to a degree that warranted an award of costs against the other, or that there were other circumstances justifying a departure from the usual rule.
The central legal issue before the court was whether any orders for costs should be made in favour of either party. This required the court to consider the general principles governing the award of costs in litigation, including the discretion vested in the court to depart from the usual rule that costs follow the event.
The court exercised its discretion and determined that no orders as to costs should be made. This indicates that neither party was successful to a degree that warranted an award of costs against the other, or that there were other circumstances justifying a departure from the usual rule.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Cole and Santos (No.2) [2016] FCCA 2582
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
4
Statutory Material Cited
0
COLE & SANTOS
[2016] FCCA 674
Penfold v Penfold
[1980] HCA 4
Penfold v Penfold
[1980] HCA 4