Kolevski v Timber Creek Holdings Pty Ltd (No 2)

The matter of Kolevski v Timber Creek Holdings Pty Ltd (No 2) involved a dispute over the variation of court orders and the allocation of costs. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, where the plaintiffs sought to challenge the defendant’s application to vary certain orders and to set aside costs.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the defendant's motion to vary the orders made under the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 36.16(3A) should be granted. The defendant sought additional declarations and an order under UCPR r 42.25(1). The plaintiffs, on the other hand, argued against the variation of the orders and raised concerns about the appropriate allocation of costs given the mixed outcomes of the case. The court had to balance the procedural fairness of the variation request against the principle that costs generally follow the event, considering the mixed outcomes of the litigation.

The court examined the principles of procedural fairness and the discretion afforded under the relevant rules. It concluded that the defendant’s motion to vary the orders was appropriate, given the circumstances and the need for clarity in the legal relationship between the parties. Regarding costs, the court found that while the principal judgment was generally in favour of the defendant, the plaintiffs had a measure of success. Therefore, the court ordered that each party bear their own costs. This decision reflects a balanced approach to both the procedural fairness in varying orders and the equitable allocation of costs.