Spathis v Nanos (No 2)

The defendants, the Nanos, applied to the court for an order that the plaintiff, Spathis, pay their costs on an indemnity or party-party basis, pursuant to section 66G of the relevant legislation. The primary dispute arose from an order that the property in question be sold, and that the proceeds of sale be divided between the parties. The plaintiff had sought an order that the defendants pay their costs on an indemnity or party-party basis. The court was required to determine whether the circumstances of the case justified deviating from the usual approach to costs and whether the plaintiff's costs should be paid out of the proceeds of sale.

The court considered the legal principles surrounding costs in property disputes, particularly focusing on the circumstances that might justify departing from the usual approach of each party bearing their own costs. It was noted that the defendants had not succeeded on any of their claims, and the plaintiff had achieved a significant victory in securing an order for the sale of the property. The court found that the circumstances did justify a departure from the usual approach to costs, as the plaintiff's success in the matter was substantial. The court further determined that it was appropriate for the plaintiff's costs to be paid out of the proceeds of sale, given the defendants' failure to succeed on any of their claims.

Accordingly, the court made an order that the plaintiff's costs were to be paid out of the proceeds of sale, but did not order the defendants to pay the plaintiff's costs on an indemnity or party-party basis. The court's decision was based on the significant success achieved by the plaintiff and the defendants' lack of success on any of their claims. The outcome ensured that the plaintiff's costs were recovered from the proceeds of the sale, reflecting the substantial nature of the plaintiff's victory in the dispute.