Gaynor v Burns (No 2)

The case of Gaynor v Burns (No 2) involved a motion to vary an order for costs. The Attorney-General of New South Wales intervened in the case, and they were the only party actively opposing the motion. The plaintiff did not address the court on the issue of costs. The court was tasked with determining whether it should have made no costs order in light of these circumstances.

The legal issues before the court included whether the court should have exercised its discretion to make no costs order given the circumstances of the case, particularly the plaintiff's failure to address the court on costs and the Attorney-General's intervention as the only active contradictor. The court also needed to consider the appropriateness of the costs order made in the original proceedings.

In deciding the matter, the court examined the discretion it has to make no costs order under relevant legal principles. The court noted that the plaintiff's failure to address the court on costs was significant and that the Attorney-General's intervention was the sole opposition to the motion. The court concluded that it was appropriate to dismiss the motion to vary the costs order. The court found that the original order for costs was not unjust and that there was no compelling reason to alter it in light of the circumstances.

The court dismissed the motion to vary the costs order, affirming that the original order remained in place. The court did not see fit to make a no costs order, but it did not alter the existing costs order. The decision underscored the importance of parties addressing the court on costs and the court's discretion in such matters.