J & A Vaughan Super Pty Ltd (Trustee) v Becton Property Group Ltd (No 4)

The case of J & A Vaughan Super Pty Ltd (Trustee) v Becton Property Group Ltd (No 4) involved an application for costs following a successful application for leave to amend pleadings. The applicant, J & A Vaughan Super Pty Ltd (Trustee), sought leave to amend its statement of claim to include additional defendants, which was granted by the court. The first and second respondents, Becton Property Group Ltd and others, opposed the application but were unsuccessful. The first respondent subsequently applied to set aside a notice to produce issued by the applicant, which was also successful. The court was tasked with determining the costs associated with these proceedings.

The primary legal issue before the court was the allocation of costs between the parties following the applicant’s successful application for leave to amend and the first respondent’s successful application to set aside the notice to produce. The court needed to consider the respective positions of the parties in light of the procedural outcomes, including the unsuccessful summary judgment application brought by the first respondent. The applicant argued for a costs order in its favour, while the first respondent sought costs for the set aside application.

The court ruled that the applicant should bear the costs of the first and second respondents on the application for leave to file the further amended statement of claim, as well as the costs thrown away due to the amendment. Regarding the first respondent’s successful application to set aside the notice to produce, the court ordered the applicant to pay the first respondent’s costs. The court reserved the costs of the first respondent’s unsuccessful summary judgment application for determination at a later stage. The orders reflect a careful consideration of the procedural history and the outcomes of the various applications made by the parties.