Griffin v Grigg

[2012] QDC 274

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Griffin v Grigg [2012] QDC 274

PARTIES:

LLOYD LENNON GRIFFIN
(Applicant)

v

ALAN CRAWFORD GRIGG
(Respondent)

FILE NO:

3876/2011

DIVISION:

PROCEEDING:

Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

21 August 2012

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

21 August 2012

JUDGE:

Samios DCJ

ORDER:

1.   That the trial for this action be set down for hearing in the District Court of Queensland on 15th, 16th and 17th October, 2012, at Brisbane.

2.   That the defendant, Alan Crawford Grigg, pay the plaintiff's costs of and incidental to the application filed on 14 August, 2012, to be assessed on the standard basis. 

CATCHWORDS:

COUNSEL:

SOLICITORS:

Northside Solicitors for the Applicant.

Holland & Holland Solicitors for the Respondent.

1. This is an application by the plaintiff for an order that the request for a trial date be dispensed with.

1. A further order is sought that the trial be expedited and/or set a date for to be fixed at the hearing of this application.

1. The dispense with the request for trial date is now not necessary because the defendant did ultimately return the request for trial date, which had been posted to the defendant's solicitors by the plaintiff's solicitors on the 12th of June, 2012.

1. I am not impressed with the argument that the matter should not be set down for trial.  If the Registry has dates available, it would be wrong in my opinion, for the parties not to take advantage of those dates, otherwise they would simply go to waste.

1. The question that remains, in my opinion, on this application is who should pay the costs.  It seems to me that the plaintiff's request that disclosure be finalised, was not significant in the scheme of things.  The defendant's solicitors ultimately did enclose a supplementary list of documents by letter on 10 July, 2012, but did not return the request for trial date.

1. It seems to me the defendant was not acting expeditiously in resolving these matters.  At the same time, the plaintiff's solicitors put the defendant's solicitors on notice that if an application had to be made, indemnity costs would be sought.

1. In the end I've come to the view that the defendant ought to pay the costs.  However, I am not persuaded they be on the indemnity basis.  It is correct that there has been some reluctance to get on with it, but I'm not persuaded that indemnity costs should follow.

1. Therefore, I am prepared to order that the matter be set down for trial, and the parties can tell me the dates that have been advised by the Registry.  And I order the defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs of this application, to be assessed, on the standard basis.

1. The orders will be that the trial for this action be set down for hearing in the District Court of Queensland on 15th, 16th and 17th October, 2012, at Brisbane.  That the defendant, Alan Crawford Grigg, pay the plaintiff's costs of and incidental to the application filed on 14 August, 2012, to be assessed on the standard basis.  So there will be an order as per the draft, initialled by me, and left with the papers.