Hodges and Xiu (No. 2)

In *Hodges and Xiu (No. 2)*, the applicant sought to have a costs order made in favour of the respondent set aside. The dispute concerned the respondent's application for an order that the applicant pay the respondent's costs of the proceeding, which had been filed on 6 February 2014. The matter came before Cronin J.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the costs order previously made in favour of the respondent should be set aside. This required the Court to consider the grounds upon which such an order could be rescinded or varied.

Cronin J dismissed the applicant's application. While the specific reasons for dismissal are not detailed in the provided text, the outcome indicates that the applicant failed to establish sufficient grounds to warrant setting aside the existing costs order. The Court ordered that its reasons be transcribed.