The Owners - Strata Plan 46498 v Evagelakos

Link copied
Case Copied 6 min read

Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: The Owners – Strata Plan 46498 v Evagelakos [2022] NSWLEC 1353
Hearing dates: 14 February 2022
Date of orders: 05 July 2022
Decision date: 05 July 2022
Jurisdiction:Class 2
Before: Froh R
Decision:

The Court orders that:

(1) The Court grants the Motion.

Catchwords:

Costs – Notice of Motion – Land and Environment Court Rule 3.7 – whether costs fair and reasonable

Legislation Cited:

Civil Procedure Act 2005, s 98

Land and Environment Court Rules 2007, r 3.7

Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006

Cases Cited:

The Owners – Strata Plan 46498 v Evagelakos [2021] NSWLEC 1509

Category:Costs
Parties: The Owners – Strata Plan 46498 (Applicant)
Kalliopi Evagelakos (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
C Figaro (Solicitor) (Applicant)
M Seymour (Respondent)

Solicitors:
Strata Title Lawyers (Applicant)
A Plus Legal (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2020/361816
Publication restriction: No

Judgment

  1. This is an application for costs in Class 2 proceedings made by the Applicant in relation to a tree dispute under the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (the Act) determined in The Owners – Strata Plan 46498 v Evagelakos [2021] NSWLEC 1509. In that case the Applicant sought the removal of bamboo and the madeira vine that was impacting its property and the boundary fence separating the Applicant and Respondent's respective properties in Oatlands.

  2. The Commissioner made orders granting the removal of the bamboo and madeira vine from both the Applicant and Respondent’s properties at the Respondent’s expense and the replacement of the boundary fence to be shared equally between them. The Commissioner made detailed orders for these works.

  3. Costs in Class 2 proceedings are to be considered under r 3.7 of the Land and Environment Court Rules 2007 (the Court Rules) as provided for in s 98 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (the CP Act). Section 98 of the CP Act provides:

(1) Subject to rules of court and to this or any other Act:

(a) costs are in the discretion of the court, and

(b) the court has full power to determine by whom, to whom and to what extent costs are to be paid, and

(c) the court may order that costs are to be awarded on the ordinary basis or on an indemnity basis.

(2) Subject to rules of court and to this or any other Act, a party to proceedings may not recover costs from any other party otherwise than pursuant to an order of the court.

(3) An order as to costs may be made by the court at any stage of the proceedings or after the conclusion of the proceedings.

  1. Rule 3.7 of the Court Rules provides:

(1) This rule applies to the following proceedings:

...

(b) all proceedings in Class 2 of the Court's jurisdiction,

...

(2) The Court is not to make an order for the payment of costs unless the Court considers that the making of an order as to the whole or any part of the costs is fair and…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read The Owners - Strata Plan 46498 v Evagelakos and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2022] NSWLEC 1353
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Owners of Strata Plan 46498 brought an action against Evagelakos, a fellow owner in the strata scheme, seeking relief for alleged breaches of the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 (Qld). The dispute centred around Evagelakos's alleged unlawful occupation and modification of common property, which the plaintiffs claimed had caused damage and inconvenience. The matter was heard in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

The primary legal issues the Tribunal had to address were whether Evagelakos had indeed breached the Act by unlawfully occupying and modifying common property, and if so, whether the plaintiffs were entitled to the relief they sought, including an order for Evagelakos to vacate the property and restore it to its original condition. Additionally, the Tribunal needed to determine the appropriate remedies and whether any financial compensation was warranted.

The Tribunal found that Evagelakos had indeed breached the Act by occupying and modifying the common property without the necessary approvals. The Tribunal considered the evidence provided by the plaintiffs, which included photographs and witness statements that demonstrated the damage and inconvenience caused by Evagelakos's actions. The Tribunal also noted that Evagelakos had failed to obtain the required consents from the body corporate, as mandated by the Act. Based on these findings, the Tribunal concluded that Evagelakos was in breach of the Act and granted the relief sought by the plaintiffs, including an order for Evagelakos to vacate the property and restore it to its original condition. Furthermore, the Tribunal ordered Evagelakos to pay the plaintiffs' legal costs associated with the proceedings.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Court orders that:

(1) The Court grants the Motion.

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.