Lemin v Cooper (No.2)

The matter before the court was an application by the plaintiffs, Lemin, for leave to appeal an order regarding costs made against them in a previous proceeding. The original proceeding was a defamation claim, in which the defendants, Cooper, sought to strike out the claim. The application to strike out was unsuccessful, but the court found that the conduct of the plaintiffs warranted the making of a costs order against them. The plaintiffs were ordered to pay the defendants' costs to be assessed on a standard basis. The plaintiffs now seek leave to appeal the costs order, alleging that the court erred in making the order. The court must determine whether leave to appeal should be granted.

In deciding whether to grant leave to appeal, the court considered the relevant principles and authorities regarding appeals from costs orders. The court noted that an appeal from a costs order is only available in limited circumstances, and that the plaintiff must demonstrate that the primary judge's decision involved a substantial miscarriage of justice or that there was a significant error of law. The court also considered the conduct of the parties and the likelihood of the appeal succeeding. The court found that the plaintiffs had not demonstrated that the primary judge's decision involved a substantial miscarriage of justice or that there was a significant error of law. The court also found that the conduct of the plaintiffs in the original proceeding was such that the making of a costs order against them was warranted.

Accordingly, the court dismissed the plaintiffs' application for leave to appeal the costs order. The court also ordered that the plaintiffs pay the defendants' costs of the application for leave to appeal. This decision is a reminder that appeals from costs orders are only available in limited circumstances, and that the conduct of the parties in the original proceeding will be taken into account in determining whether leave to appeal should be granted.