Larsen v Tastec Pty Ltd (No 2)

Court of Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Larsen v Tastec Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] NSWCA 141

Hearing dates:

On the papers

Date of orders:

27 June 2023

Decision date:

27 June 2023

Before:

Ward P; Mitchelmore JA; Kirk JA

Decision:

The respondents’ application to vary the orders of the Court dated 9 March 2023 is dismissed with costs.

Catchwords:

COSTS – setting aside and variation of costs order – Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) rule 36.16 – where costs awarded to successful appellants despite lack of success on all grounds of appeal – whether to vary order awarding costs of appeal given mixed success by the appellants – whether to set aside order setting aside costs order below in respondents’ favour given mixed success by appellants

Legislation Cited:

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 36.16

Cases Cited:

Bostik Australia Pty Ltd v Liddiard (No 2) [2009] NSWCA 304

Ryde Developments Pty Ltd v The Property Investing Alliance Pty Ltd [2018] NSWCA 40

Sims v The Commonwealth (No 2) [2023] NSWCA 30

University of Wollongong v Metwally (No 2) (1985) 59 ALJR 481; [1985] HCA 28

Category:

Costs

Parties:

Derek Larsen as trustee for the Larsen Superannuation Fund (ABN 95 894 143 943) (First Appellant
Floyd Larsen as trustee for the Larsen Superannuation Fund (ABN 95 894 143 943) (Second Appellant)
Tastec Pty Ltd (formerly Wonders Building Company Pty Limited) (ACN 051 516 682) (First Respondent)
Stephen Sainsbury (Second Respondent)

Representation:

Counsel:
I Roberts SC / J Wright (Appellants)
M Gracie (Respondents)

Solicitors:
Mills Oakley (Appellants)
Whitfields Solicitors (Respondents)

File Number(s):

2021/363142

Publication restriction:

Nil

 Decision under appeal 

Court or tribunal:

District Court of New South Wales

Date of Decision:

17 December 2021

Before:

S J Gibb DCJ

File Number(s):

2020/83478

Judgment

1. THE COURT: On 9 March 2023, the Court allowed an appeal by the appellants, Mr and Mrs Larsen, against a decision of S J Gibb DCJ in the District Court concerning the respondents’ supply and assembly of a pre-fabricated house on the Larsens’ property: Larsen v Tastec Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCA 39. We will assume familiarity with those reasons and, for convenience, we will use the same defined terms.

2. The Court made the following orders:

“(1)   Appeal allowed.

(2)   Set aside Order 1 of the orders of the District Court on 17 December 2021, and Order 4 of the orders of the District Court on 4 March 2022.

(3)   In lieu thereof, order that:

(a)   The Plaintiff’s claim for damages for breach of contract against the First Defendant is dismissed.

(b)   The Plaintiff’s claim against the First and Second Defendants for relief under the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) be remitted to the District Court, to a judge other than the primary judge, for determination of:

(i)   what relief (if any) should be granted pursuant to s 236 and/or s 237 of the ACL, and

(ii)   the costs of the proceedings.

(4)   The respondents are to pay the appellants’ costs of…