Sorrentino Designs Pty Ltd v McKenna

In the case of Sorrentino Designs Pty Ltd v McKenna, the plaintiff, Sorrentino Designs, sought to discontinue their proceedings against the defendant, McKenna, after the second day of trial. The dispute arose from Sorrentino Designs' claim against McKenna, which was challenged on the first day of the trial. The case was heard in the Supreme Court, although it could have been heard in the Magistrates Court due to the nature of the claims involved.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to discontinue the proceedings and, if so, on what basis the costs of the proceeding should be awarded. The court considered the appropriateness of Sorrentino Designs as the party to bring the proceedings, the timeliness of the defendant's objections, and the implications of the plaintiff's decision to discontinue.

The court found that Sorrentino Designs was not the appropriate party to bring the proceedings, and the defendant bore some responsibility for not raising the issues prior to the trial. Given these circumstances, the court granted leave for the plaintiff to discontinue the proceeding. However, the court also held that the plaintiff should pay the defendant’s costs of the proceeding on the standard basis, reflecting the plaintiff's decision to discontinue after significant issues had been raised.

The final order was that the plaintiff had leave to discontinue the proceeding and that the plaintiff pay the defendant’s costs on the standard basis.