Lee v Abedian (No 2)

[2016] QSC 114

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Lee v Abedian & Ors (No 2) [2016] QSC 114

PARTIES:

MARCUS RAMON LEE

(plaintiff)

v

SOHEIL ABEDIAN

(first defendant)

DAVID SCOTT BROWN

(second defendant)

RONALD JOHN EAMES

(third defendant)

PAUL EDWARD BAXTER, RODNEY GRAEME BESLEY, ANTHONY JAMES BUTLER, PHILIP JOHN BYRNES, DREW ANTHONY CASTLEY, ANTHONY JAMES CONAGHAN, BENTLEY SEAN COOGAN, JAMES BUCHANAN DANIEL, PHILIP BRIAN DOWLING, JAMES PATRICK FEEHELY, ANDREW ROBERTSON FORBES, EUGENE YUK-KWAN FUNG, ALISON BERESFORD HALY, ANDREW JAMES KELLY, MICHAEL FINDLAY MARSHALL, MARTIN DENNIS McENIERY, SAMANTHA JANE O’BRIEN, CHRISTOPHER JOHN O’SHEA, ROGER WILLIAM QUICK, SEAN ANTHONY SULLIVAN, LAWRENCE NEIL WARD

(fourth defendants)

SUNLAND GROUP LIMITED

(fifth defendant)

FILE NO/S:

SC No 982 of 2015

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Application for Costs

DELIVERED ON:

30 May 2016

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

Heard on the papers

JUDGE:

Bond J

ORDER:

The order of the Court is that the plaintiff pay the first, second, third and fifth defendants’ costs of the amended application filed 4 June 2015.

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – COSTS – GENERAL RULE – COSTS FOLLOW THE EVENT – where first, second, third and fifth defendant’s application for strike out was adjourned – where plaintiff subsequently filed amended pleadings – where first, second, third and fifth defendants successful in application to strike out certain paragraphs of the amended pleadings – whether the plaintiff should pay the costs of the adjourned application

Lee v Abedian & Ors [2016] QSC 92, cited

COUNSEL:

W Sofronoff QC, with M A Hoch, for the plaintiff

S L Doyle QC, with S J Webster, for the first, second, third and fifth defendants

SOLICITORS:

Shand Taylor Lawyers for the plaintiff
Holding Redlich for the first, second, third and fifth defendants

1. My judgment delivered on 28 April 2016[1] dealt with strike out applications by –

   (a)the fourth defendants; and

   (b)the first, second, third and fifth defendants.

   [1]Lee v Abedian & Ors [2016] QSC 92.

2. On the application by the fourth defendants filed 26 October 2015, I ordered:

   (a)the claim against the fourth defendants is struck out; and

   (b)the plaintiff pay the fourth defendants’ costs of the proceeding.

3. The plaintiff has since delivered written submissions indicating that he accepts that the latter order included the costs of the application filed 26 October 2015.

4. On the application by the first, second, third and fifth defendants, I ordered:

   (a)the plaintiff’s claim in negligence against the third defendant and paragraphs 86 to 93 of the statement of claim are struck out;

   (b)the following paragraphs of the statement of claim are struck out, with leave to re-plead:

   (i)      paragraphs 80 to 85;

   (ii)     paragraphs 94 to 105;

   (iii)    paragraph 8(d); and

   (iv)    paragraphs 29 and 49;

   (c)paragraphs 61 and 62 of the statement of claim are struck out;

   (d)the plaintiff pay the first, second, third and fifth defendants’ costs of the third amended application filed 28 October 2015.

5. I wrote that I would hear the parties on whether I should make, as the first,…