Court of Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Slaveski v Nanevski Developments Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] NSWCA 170 Hearing dates: On the papers Date of orders: 27 July 2023 Decision date: 27 July 2023 Before: Meagher JA; Kirk JA; Griffiths AJA Decision: (1) Set aside orders 17 and 18 made by the Supreme Court on 6 September 2022 relating to costs of the proceedings below, and in lieu thereof:
(a) The cross-claimants are to pay the costs of Tom Nanevski on the cross-claim.
(b) The defendants are to pay 75% of the plaintiff’s costs of proceedings 2019/153341 up until 30 August 2022, including as regards the cross-claim, noting that this order does not affect any costs the subject of a separate costs order.
Catchwords: COSTS — Determination — Review/appeal — Allocation of costs for claim and cross-claim in proceedings below — Where cross-defendant not joined to the appeal — Degree of success and resources expended
Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 98(1)
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 42.1
Cases Cited: Allianz Australia Insurance Ltd v Rawson Homes Pty Ltd (No 2) [2021] NSWCA 334
DSHE Holdings Ltd (Receivers and Managers) (in liq) v Potts (No 2) [2022] NSWCA 258
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Ken Slaveski (First Appellant)
Nanevski Developments Pty Ltd (Respondent)
Biljana Slaveski (Second Appellant)
James Slaveski (Third Appellant)
Mega-Top Cargo Pty Ltd (Fourth Appellant)Representation: Counsel:
N J Kidd SC and C Robinson (Appellants)
P Knowles SC and P W McDonald (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Valorum Law Group (Appellants)
Everingham Solomons (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2022/268686 Publication restriction: Nil Decision under appeal
- Court or tribunal:
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction:
- Equity
- Citation:
- Date of Decision:
- 9 August 2022
- Before:
- Kunc J
- File Number(s):
- 2019/153341; 2019/95876
JUDGMENT
-
THE COURT: The Court handed down its judgment in this appeal on 29 June 2023: Slaveski v Nanevski Developments Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCA 145 (Judgment). Four issues were raised challenging factual findings made by the primary judge. The context of the judgment and the issues in dispute will not be repeated here, and familiarity with that judgment will be assumed.
-
The result of the appeal, the Court’s reasoning as to why the parties should bear their own costs of the appeal, and its preliminary view as to the costs orders in the proceeding below, were explained in the Judgment as follows:
[88] The appellants have succeeded on three out of four issues (ie all but the third issue, relating to Ground 5). Yet for the first issue, relating to the $590,000 loan, it is difficult to discern any practical significance to the claim beyond a minor entitlement to interest, and in circumstances where the appellants advanced not a skerrick of reasoning in support of their position in the Court below. On the second issue, dealing with the $302,500 in cash,…
Continue reading Slaveski v Nanevski Developments Pty Ltd (No 2)
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Slaveski v Nanevski Developments Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] NSWCA 170
- Case
- [2023] NSWCA 170
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the costs orders made by the Supreme Court were appropriate, particularly in light of the degree of success achieved by the parties and the resources expended in the litigation. A key consideration was the fact that Tom Nanevski, as a cross-defendant, had not been joined as a party to the appeal itself.
The Court of Appeal set aside the original costs orders. It reasoned that the primary judge had erred in their allocation of costs, failing to adequately account for the success of the cross-claimants against Tom Nanevski on the cross-claim. The Court ordered that the cross-claimants pay the costs of Tom Nanevski specifically on the cross-claim. Furthermore, the Court ordered that the defendants pay 75% of the plaintiff's costs for the main proceedings up to a specified date, including costs related to the cross-claim, while acknowledging that this did not impact any costs already subject to a separate order.
Orders
Orders of the court
(1) Set aside orders 17 and 18 made by the Supreme Court on 6 September 2022 relating to costs of the proceedings below, and in lieu thereof:
(a) The cross-claimants are to pay the costs of Tom Nanevski on the cross-claim.
(b) The defendants are to pay 75% of the plaintiff’s costs of proceedings 2019/153341 up until 30 August 2022, including as regards the cross-claim, noting that this order does not affect any costs the subject of a separate costs order.
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.