Tennent v Moukhlina (No 2) (Costs) (RLD)

In the case, Tennent v Moukhlina, the appellants sought costs incurred during the proceedings at first instance and on appeal. The dispute centred around retail leases and the related costs incurred during the trial and appeal processes. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland, where the appellants had previously been granted relief in relation to the retail leases. The respondents, however, contested the costs incurred by the appellants during both the first instance and appeal processes.

The court had to determine the appropriate costs order in light of the procedural history of the case and the amendments to the costs provisions. Specifically, the court had to decide whether the old costs provisions, which applied before the amendments, should be applied to the costs of the substantive hearings. The court also had to decide whether the appellants were entitled to the costs thrown away at first instance and the costs of the appeal.

The court found that the old costs provisions should apply to the costs of the substantive hearings, as the hearings occurred before the recent amendments. The court determined that the appellants were entitled to the costs thrown away at first instance in relation to the vacation of the trial dates, but there should be no order for the costs of the proceedings at first instance. Regarding the appeal, the court held that the appellants were entitled to the costs of and incidental to the appeal. Consequently, the court ordered that the respondents pay the appellants' costs thrown away at first instance and the costs of the appeal.