Taylor v Owners - Strata Plan No 11564 (No 2)

In *Taylor v Owners - Strata Plan No 11564 (No 2)*, the applicant sought to vary a costs order made by the Court of Appeal. The dispute concerned whether the applicant should be ordered to pay only one set of costs to multiple respondents, despite those respondents being represented separately in the main proceedings. The appeal itself had been determined on a discrete question, and on that question, the respondents' interests were identical. The applicant had also given advance notice of their objection to paying more than one set of costs.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether to vary the existing costs order to reflect the specific circumstances of the appeal, particularly the alignment of the respondents' interests on the discrete question and the applicant's prior notification of objection to multiple sets of costs. The court also had to consider the application of rule 51.4 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules in determining the appropriate costs order.

The Court of Appeal reasoned that while separate representation in the main proceedings might ordinarily warrant separate costs orders, the circumstances of this appeal, where the respondents' interests were identical on the specific issue before the court, justified a departure from that general rule. The court noted the applicant's advance notice of objection and the fact that the respondents' interests were not truly at odds on the discrete question that formed the basis of the appeal. Consequently, the court varied the original costs order to require the appellant to pay only one set of costs to the first four and sixth respondents. The court further ordered that these costs should not include the expense of a particular document that was not relied upon at the hearing. Finally, the court ordered the first four and sixth respondents to pay the appellant's costs of the motion to vary the order.