McDermott v McDermott (No. 3)

In the matter of McDermott v McDermott (No. 3), the applicant sought to appeal a costs order made in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The case involved a dispute over the financial obligations of the parties following the conclusion of legal proceedings. The applicant, who had initially started the proceedings, sought leave to appeal a costs order made on 18 December 2019, as well as another order made on 20 November 2023. Additionally, the applicant sought to set aside these costs orders under the relevant rules of court.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the applicant should be granted leave to appeal the costs order and whether the costs orders should be set aside. The court needed to consider the criteria for granting leave to appeal under section 64 of the Supreme Court of Queensland Act 1991 and whether the circumstances warranted a review of the costs orders under rules 667 and 668 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld). The applicant argued that new facts had arisen which justified a different outcome regarding the costs orders.

The court found that the application for leave to appeal the costs orders did not meet the criteria for leave under section 64 of the Act. The court was also not persuaded that the applicant had provided sufficient grounds to warrant setting aside the costs orders. Consequently, the court dismissed the application for leave to appeal and the application to set aside the costs orders. The applicant was ordered to pay the respondents’ costs for the amended applications filed on 31 March 2025 and 3 April 2025.