Ross Bilton v Georgia Ligdas (Costs)

In the case of Ross Bilton v Georgia Ligdas, the dispute involved multiple groups of plaintiffs seeking easements over a property owned by the defendant. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The plaintiffs, Bilton and others, sought easements by prescription over a passageway and by virtue of section 88K of the Property Law Act 1974 (Qld). The defendant, Ligdas, resisted the claims, arguing that the plaintiffs were not entitled to the easements as sought.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether there was any disentitling conduct by the defendant that would prevent her from benefiting from section 88K (5) of the Property Law Act 1974 (Qld) and whether the second gate installed by the defendant constituted an obstruction to the easements granted. The court had to determine the appropriate allocation of costs between the parties.

The court held that the defendant was entitled to resist the section 88K claim as her conduct did not amount to disentitling conduct under section 88K (5). Consequently, the court ruled that each party should bear their own costs. Regarding the second gate, the court found that it obstructed the prescriptive easement to which two sets of plaintiffs were entitled. As a result, the gate was ordered to be removed.

The court's final orders were that the defendant was not to be denied the benefit of section 88K (5) and that each party was to bear their own costs. Additionally, the second gate was to be removed to ensure it did not obstruct the easements granted to the plaintiffs.