The Owners - Strata Plan 89041 v Galyan Pty Ltd (No 2)

The Owners - Strata Plan 89041 brought proceedings against Galyan Pty Ltd, seeking a declaration that the parties were to equally share the costs of appointing a referee to assist in resolving a dispute under a Heads of Agreement. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute centred on the interpretation of the Heads of Agreement, specifically whether the agreement to share equally the costs of the referees was subject to agreement as to how the costs of the proceedings were to be resolved.

The central legal issue before the court was the interpretation of the Heads of Agreement, specifically the clause concerning the sharing of costs. The Owners - Strata Plan 89041 argued that the clause was a binding agreement that the parties were to share equally the costs of appointing a referee. Galyan Pty Ltd contended that the clause was subject to agreement as to how the costs of the proceedings were to be resolved, and that therefore the clause was not binding. The court had to determine whether the clause was a binding agreement or if it was subject to further agreement, and if so, what that agreement entailed.

The court held that the clause was a binding agreement that the parties were to share equally the costs of appointing a referee. The court found that the clause was not subject to agreement as to how the costs of the proceedings were to be resolved, and that therefore the parties were bound to share equally the costs of appointing a referee. The court held that the proper construction of the clause was that the parties were to share equally the costs of appointing a referee, and that this was a binding agreement between the parties. The court also held that the agreement to share equally the costs of the proceedings was not subject to agreement as to how the costs of the proceedings were to be resolved, and that therefore the parties were bound to share equally the costs of the proceedings.

The court ordered that the parties were to equally share the costs of the proceedings, including the costs of appointing a referee. The court also ordered that the parties were to equally share the costs of the proceedings, including the costs of appointing a referee, and that this was a binding agreement between the parties. The court further ordered that the agreement to share equally the costs of the proceedings was not subject to agreement as to how the costs of the proceedings were to be resolved, and that therefore the parties were bound to share equally the costs of the proceedings.