Skycity Adelaide Pty Ltd v Treasurer of South Australia & Anor (No 2)

Skycity Adelaide Pty Ltd (the appellant) sought to disturb a costs order made by the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia. The Treasurer of South Australia and another (the respondents) were the other parties involved. The dispute concerned the appropriate allocation of costs following a decision on a Case Stated.

The central legal issue before the Full Court was whether the previous costs order, which had been made by the Court itself, was unreasonable or unjust, thereby warranting disturbance. This required the Court to consider the relative success of the parties on the various questions agitated in the Case Stated and to assess the overall circumstances, including the time spent and the importance of the issues.

The Court determined that the initial costs order, which allowed for a 25 per cent allowance in the appellant's favour, was a broad but appropriate reflection of the parties' relative successes. This allowance was made having regard to all the circumstances of the Case Stated. The Court found no reason to disturb this order, concluding it was neither unreasonable nor unjust. Consequently, the Court did not require further submissions from the respondents on the matter. However, the appellant was ordered to pay the costs associated with the further submissions on costs.