McDonald v Wills (No 2)

In the case of McDonald v Wills (No 2), the plaintiff sought an order under the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules that the issue of damages be heard separately from and subsequently to the balance of the issues in the proceedings. The nature of the dispute involved the allocation of costs associated with the successful motion for separate damages determination. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the plaintiff was entitled to an order for costs following the successful motion to separate the issue of damages. The court had to consider the principles governing the award of costs in such circumstances, particularly in light of the general rule that the party who is successful on a motion should be awarded costs of the motion. The court also had to evaluate whether the plaintiff's success warranted an order for costs beyond those directly related to the motion.

The court found that while the plaintiff was entitled to costs of the motion, the circumstances did not warrant an order for further costs. The court emphasised that the decision to order separate damages determination was a matter of judicial discretion, and the plaintiff's success did not automatically entitle them to additional costs. The court balanced the need for efficient case management with the principle that costs should not be awarded as a matter of course. The court concluded that the plaintiff's success on the motion did not merit an order for further costs beyond those directly attributable to the motion itself.

The court's final orders were that the plaintiff was entitled to costs of the motion but not to any further costs associated with the successful application to separate the issue of damages. The plaintiff was directed to file and serve a statement of costs within 14 days of the judgment.