Douglas v Kik; Douglas v Kekatos

[2021] NSWSC 345

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Douglas v Kik; Douglas v Kekatos [2021] NSWSC 345

Hearing dates:

13 August 2020

Date of orders:

7 April 2021

Decision date:

07 April 2021

Jurisdiction:

Common Law

Before:

Rothman J

Decision:

The Court orders that Order 5 of the Orders issued on

3 December 2020 be vacated.

Category:

Costs

Parties:

Douglas v Kik (2016/103090):

Janina Kik & David Anthony James (First & Second Cross-Claimants; Applicants on the Motion)
Trudy Douglas (First Cross-Defendant; Respondent to the Motion)

Douglas v Kekatos (2020/219354):

Trudy Douglas (Plaintiff)
Jim Kekatos t/as Kekatos Lawyers (Defendant)

Representation:

Douglas v Kik (2016/103090):

R Allsop (Applicants)
S Levitt (Respondent)

Douglas v Kekatos (2020/219354):

S Levitt (Plaintiff)
D Lloyd (Defendant)

File Number(s):

2016/103090; 2020/219354

Judgment

1. HIS HONOUR: On 3 December 2020, the Court as presently constituted dismissed an application for cross-vesting of these matters to the Family Court of Australia. Other orders were made expediting the proceedings in this Court and hearing them together.

2. The expedition was for the purpose of facilitating the finalisation of the matters prior to the related Family Court proceedings, listed for May 2021. The Court made orders that the costs of the cross-vesting proceedings be costs in each of the substantive proceedings and gave leave to apply for a different order for costs.

3. An application for a different order was made by one of the parties to the proceedings in this Court. The Court indicated it would deal with that application at the same time as the substantive hearing.

4. Today, on the second day the proceedings were listed for substantive hearing, orders were made by consent the effect of which were to dismiss the proceedings and order that each party to the proceedings in this Court bear his, her or its own costs.

5. The parties have informed the Court that there is no desire to have the costs orders already made altered. As a consequence, the Court orders that Order 5 of the Orders issued on 3 December 2020 be vacated.

**********

Decision last updated: 07 April 2021