Ferkovic v Kioussis

In the matter of Ferkovic v Kioussis, the dispute involved an application for costs following a proceeding where the plaintiff, Ferkovic, sought an order for costs against the defendant, Kioussis. The case was heard by the Supreme Court of Victoria. The plaintiff argued that the defendant's failure to disclose certain costs in his costs disclosure statement justified an order for the plaintiff's costs. The defendant contested this, asserting that the non-disclosure was not significant enough to warrant such an order.

The court was required to determine whether the defendant's failure to disclose certain costs in his costs disclosure statement was material and if it justified an order for the plaintiff's costs. The court considered the nature of the costs that were undisclosed, the impact of the non-disclosure on the proceedings, and whether the plaintiff was prejudiced by the failure to disclose. It also assessed whether the defendant's conduct warranted a penalty in the form of costs.

The court found that the non-disclosure of certain costs did not materially prejudice the plaintiff or affect the outcome of the proceedings. The court held that the defendant's conduct did not warrant the imposition of costs on the plaintiff. The court emphasised that costs should only be awarded when there has been a significant failure to disclose that prejudices the opposing party. In this instance, the court determined that the plaintiff was not prejudiced by the non-disclosure and thus dismissed the summons. The court also ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendant's disbursements in respect of the summons.