Kent Street Pty Ltd v Department of Natural Resources and Mines (No 2)

Kent Street Pty Ltd and others appealed against a decision of the Land Court which involved the valuation of land. The respondents were the Department of Natural Resources and Mines. The appeal was heard in the Queensland Court of Appeal, where the appellants were successful. The appellants then sought an order for part of the costs of the appeal and the whole, or alternatively part, of the costs at first instance.

The legal issues before the Court were whether, given the 2008 amendments to the Valuation of Land Act 1944 (Qld), costs should be awarded to the appellants for resisting the respondents’ application to introduce new material before the hearing of the appeal, and if so, how those costs should be assessed. The Court needed to consider whether the appellants were entitled to costs for the time spent dealing with the application to introduce new material, and if so, whether the costs should be assessed on the standard or indemnity basis.

The Court found that the appellants were entitled to costs for the time spent dealing with the application to introduce new material, as this was a necessary step in resisting the appeal. However, the Court also found that the costs should be assessed on the standard basis, and not the indemnity basis as sought by the appellants. The Court concluded that the appellants were entitled to costs for the time spent dealing with the application to introduce new material, but that the costs should be assessed on the standard basis, and not the indemnity basis as sought by the appellants.

The Court made an order that the respondents pay the appellants’ costs of and incidental to resisting the respondents’ application to introduce new material prior to the hearing of the appeal on 4 August 2008, save for the costs associated with the indexed valuation, to be assessed on the standard basis. The Court also dismissed the appellants’ application for costs otherwise.