Nominal Defendant v Kostic

The appeal concerned a dispute between the Nominal Defendant and Kostic, heard in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales. The core of the disagreement revolved around the adequacy of the trial judge's reasons for their decision, particularly concerning the consideration of evidence presented.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the trial judge had failed to provide sufficient reasons for their judgment, or had failed to adequately consider relevant evidence. A further issue was whether these perceived failures warranted the ordering of a new trial.

The Court found that the trial judge had indeed failed to give adequate reasons for their decision and had not properly considered all the relevant evidence. Consequently, the judgment of the District Court was set aside, and the assessment of damages was remitted to the District Court for a rehearing. The respondent was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal, with specific provisions regarding certain costs and a certificate under the Suitors' Fund Act. The registrar was also requested to forward a copy of the judgment to the Attorney General for consideration of an ex gratia payment for wasted trial costs.