Lin and Anor v BHW Capital Pty Limited and Anor (No. 2)

The appeal was brought by the respondents against a decision that they were to pay one half of the legal costs incurred by the appellants. The appellants, Lin and another, had brought claims against the respondents, BHW Capital Pty Limited and another, and the claims were complex and involved multiple issues. The trial judge found that the appellants were successful on some claims and the respondents were successful on others. The issue before the court was whether costs should be apportioned between the parties, or if one party should bear the entire costs, and whether the costs should be assessed on an indemnity basis due to untruthful acts by one of the parties.

The court found that the costs should not be apportioned between the parties, but rather each party should bear their own costs. The court noted that the general rule in Australia is that costs follow the event, but this is not an absolute rule. The court held that the general rule did not apply in this case because of the unique circumstances, including the untruthful acts by one of the parties. The court also found that the costs should not be assessed on an indemnity basis because there was no evidence of oppressive or vexatious conduct by either party. The court held that the costs order was not affected by the untruthful acts because the court was not required to make findings on the truth of the evidence.

The court also considered the issue of damages and whether a separate hearing was required. The court found that a separate hearing was not required because the evidence was sufficient to determine the market price of the shares. The court held that the costs of adducing further evidence would outweigh the amount of damages sought, and therefore the court should assess the damages on the available evidence. The final orders of the court were that each party bear their own costs and that the respondents were not required to pay one half of the legal costs incurred by the appellants.