Richards v Gray No 2

Case [2014] NSWCA 83


Court of Appeal


Supreme Court


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: Richards v Gray No 2 [2014] NSWCA 83
Hearing dates:On the papers
Decision date: 28 March 2014
Before: Bathurst CJ at [1], Beazley P at [27], McColl JA at [28], Basten JA at [29], Meagher JA at [30]
Decision:

(1)Set aside Orders 1A, 6 and 7 of the orders made by the primary judge and entered on 16 December 2011.

(2)The defendant pay any part of the judgment amount not yet paid to the Trust Company Limited pursuant to s 77(3)(b) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW).

(3)Set aside the order for costs made by the primary judge contained in par [38] of her judgment of 13 April 2012 and in lieu thereof make the following orders:

(a)Subject to subpars (b) and (c) hereof, order that the defendant pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings.

(b)Order that the plaintiff pay the defendant's costs of and incidental to the hearing of 16 August 2011.

(c)Order that the defendant pay one half of the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings from 19 August 2011 to 8 December 2011.

(d)Order that the respondent pay 50% of the appellant's costs of the appeal.

(e)If eligible the respondent be granted a certificate under s 6B(2) of the Suitor's Fund Act 1951.

(f)Cross-appeal dismissed.

(g)Order that the respondent pay the appellant's costs of the cross-appeal.

[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]

Catchwords: COSTS - trial costs - discretion of trial judge
COSTS - appeal costs - general rule that costs follow event - multiple issues - partial success - apportionment
Legislation Cited: Suitor's Fund Act 1951 (NSW), s 6B(2)
Uniform Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 77(3)(b)
Cases Cited: Gray v Richards [2011] NSWSC 877
Gray v Richards (No 3) [2012] NSWSC 344
Richards v Gray [2013] NSWCA 402
Texts Cited: -
Category:Costs
Parties: Corey Richards (Appellant/Cross Respondent)
Rhiannon Gray by her Tutor Kathleen Anne Gray (Respondent/Cross Appellant)
Representation: Counsel:
P J Deakin QC / B A P Kelleher (Appellant / Cross Respondent)
Dr A S Morrison SC / I J McGillicuddy (Respondent / Cross Appellant)
Solicitors:
T L Lawyers (Appellant / Cross Respondent)
Beilby Poulden Costello (Respondent/ Cross Appellant)
File Number(s):2012/9520
Publication restriction:-
 Decision under appeal 
Jurisdiction:
9111
Citation:
Gray v Richards [2011] NSWSC 877
Gray v Richards (No 2) [2011] NSWSC 1502
Gray v Richards (No 3) [2012] NSWSC 344
Before:
McCallum J
File Number(s):
2009/338685

Judgment

  1. BATHURST CJ: This judgment should be read in conjunction with the judgment of this Court of 2 December 2013, Richards v Gray [2013] NSWCA 402 (the 2…

Continue reading Richards v Gray No 2

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Richards v Gray No 2 [2014] NSWCA 83
Case
[2014] NSWCA 83
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal concerned the costs orders made by the primary judge in proceedings between Richards (the plaintiff) and Gray (the defendant). The dispute involved multiple issues, and the primary judge had made specific orders regarding the payment of the judgment amount and the allocation of costs. The appeal was heard by Bathurst CJ, Beazley P, McColl, Basten, and Meagher JJA.

The court was required to determine whether the primary judge had erred in exercising their discretion regarding the costs of the proceedings. This involved considering the general rule that costs follow the event, the principle of partial success, and the appropriate apportionment of costs when multiple issues were litigated. The court also had to consider the costs of the appeal itself and a cross-appeal.

The Court of Appeal set aside the primary judge's orders concerning the payment of the judgment amount and the costs of the proceedings. In lieu of the primary judge's costs order, the Court of Appeal ordered that the defendant pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings, subject to specific adjustments. These adjustments included the plaintiff paying the defendant's costs for a particular hearing, the defendant paying one half of the plaintiff's costs for a defined period, and the respondent (the plaintiff in the appeal) paying 50% of the appellant's (the defendant in the appeal) costs of the appeal. The court also made orders regarding a certificate under the Suitor's Fund Act 1951, dismissed the cross-appeal, and ordered the respondent to pay the appellant's costs of the cross-appeal.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1)Set aside Orders 1A, 6 and 7 of the orders made by the primary judge and entered on 16 December 2011.

(2)The defendant pay any part of the judgment amount not yet paid to the Trust Company Limited pursuant to s 77(3)(b) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW).

(3)Set aside the order for costs made by the primary judge contained in par [38] of her judgment of 13 April 2012 and in lieu thereof make the following orders:

(a)Subject to subpars (b) and (c) hereof, order that the defendant pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings.

(b)Order that the plaintiff pay the defendant's costs of and incidental to the hearing of 16 August 2011.

(c)Order that the defendant pay one half of the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings from 19 August 2011 to 8 December 2011.

(d)Order that the respondent pay 50% of the appellant's costs of the appeal.

(e)If eligible the respondent be granted a certificate under s 6B(2) of the Suitor's Fund Act 1951.

(f)Cross-appeal dismissed.

(g)Order that the respondent pay the appellant's costs of the cross-appeal.

[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.