Fares v Bleakley

CITATION:	Fares & ors v Bleakley & anor [2006] NSWADT 53
DIVISION:	Retail Leases Division
PARTIES:	APPLICANTS Ghassan Fares Jittmia Chawalittara Kektanok Roongsawang Jutarpon Channoom RESPONDENTS Robert John Bleakley Shala Pty Limited CROSS APPLICANTS Robert John Bleakley Shala Pty Limited CROSS RESPONDENTS Ghassan Fares Jittmia Chawalittara Kektanok Roongsawang Jutarpon Channoom
FILE NUMBER:	035135; 045036
HEARING DATES:	On the papers
SUBMISSIONS CLOSED:	11/16/2005
DATE OF DECISION:	02/21/2006
BEFORE:	Boyce P - Judicial Member
CATCHWORDS:	Costs
MATTER FOR DECISION:	Costs
LEGISLATION CITED:	Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 Retail Leases Act 1994
CASES CITED:	Alessa v Total and Universal Pty Limited [2001] NSW ADT 150 at [4-6] Alessa v Total and Universal Pty Limited [2001] NSW ADT 150 at [4-6] Citadin Pty Limited v Eddie Azzi Australia Pty Ltd & Anor (No2) [2001] NSW ATAP 31Forma v BHP Co. Ltd [1999] NSW ADT 59G&M Dawson Pty Limited -v- Cripps & Ors (No.3)(RLD)[2005] NSW ADTAP 24Gizah Pty Limited v Axa Trustees Limited (No 2) [2001] NSW ADT 164 at [29]Hoblos v Marchese [1999] NSW ADT 127)Holpitt Pty Ltd v Varimu Pty Ltd (1991) 103 ALR 684Langley v UNSW (1984) EOC 92-018 at 75 468Trust Company of Australia Limited v Craig and Ors [2005] NSWADT 65 at [44]Wood and Anor v Bergman (No.2) [2003] NSWADT 175 at [11]
REPRESENTATION:	APPLICANTS & CROSS RESPONDENTS M Southwick, barrister RESPONDENTS & CROSS APPLICANTS D Warren, barrister
ORDERS:	1.The application for costs by the Respondents is dismissed; 2.No order as to costs.

1 This is an application by the Respondents and the Cross Applicants, Robert John Bleakley and Shala Pty Limited who will be called in this decision the Respondents, for an order for costs against the Applicants and Cross Respondents, Ghassan Fares, Jittmia Chawalittara, Kektanok Roongsawang and Jutarpon Channoom, who will be called in this decision the Applicants.

2 The Applicants made an application for a declaration of rights, obligations and liabilities under a lease and a claim for payment of monies against the Respondents. The Respondents cross-application sought orders for payment of money by the Applicants.

3 This Tribunal gave its decision on 11 October 2005 making orders in matter No 035135, partially dismissing the Applicants’ application and ordering the Respondents to repay to the Applicants the security deposit held by the Respondents under a retail lease and ordering that an overpayment of outgoings paid by the Applicants during the lease be repaid by the Respondents to the Applicants.

4 In respect of the Respondents Cross Application, matter no. 045036, this Tribunal ordered that it be dismissed.

5 In my decision of 11 October 2005 I made further orders that the parties could make written submissions in relation to costs within 28 days of that decision. On 4 November 2005 the Respondents made their submissions in support of their application for costs and the Applicants made their submissions in reply on 15 November 2005. Although the Applicants made their response outside the time for making their submissions in accordance with the orders of 11…