The Owners - Strata Plan No 70762 v L and C Platt Constructions Pty Ltd

[2014] NSWCATCD 41

NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	The Owners - Strata Plan No 70762 v L & C Platt Constructions Pty Ltd [2014] NSWCATCD 41
Hearing dates:	written submissions
Decision date:	03 April 2014
Before:	S Westgarth, Deputy President
Decision:	The applicant is to pay 80% of the respondent's costs assessed on the ordinary basis.
Catchwords:	Costs
Legislation Cited:	Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act (the CTTT Act) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (the Act)
Cases Cited:	Latoudis v Casey [1990] 170CLR534 James and ORS v Surf Road Nominees Pty Ltd and ORS [2][2005] NSWCA296 Waters v PC Henderson (Aus) Pty Ltd unreported NSWCA Arian v Nguyen [2001] NSWCA5 Hughes v Western Australia Cricket Association (1986) ATPR40-478
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	The Owners - Strata Plan No 70762 (applicant) L & C Platt Constructions Pty Ltd (respondent)
Representation:	M J Dawson (for applicant) M McCall (for respondent) Vardenega Roberts (for applicant) Stafford Lawyers (for respondent)
File Number(s):	HB 09/24088
Publication restriction:	Unrestricted

reasons for decision

Introduction

1. The applicant seeks an order that its costs be paid by the respondent, or in the alternative, that there be no order as to costs (meaning that each party should bear their own costs). The respondent seeks an order that the applicant pay its costs.

1. Both applications for costs arise out of a decision (the Decision) of this Tribunal dated 10 January 2014 in these proceedings in which the relevant substantive order (the Order) made was that the respondent is to pay the applicant $47,296.00. The breakdown of that amount is described in paragraph 129 of the Decision, namely as follows:

• $1,075.00 is constituted as an amount agreed between the parties at a conclave held between them prior to the hearing.
• $6,000.00 constitutes an amount found by the Tribunal to be due by the respondent in favour of the applicant in respect of incomplete work.
• Two amounts (one for $6,500.00 and the other for $33,721.00) being amounts which the respondent conceded after the hearing ought to be paid to the applicant. I will refer to these two amounts as the deposit /excess claim.

Jurisdiction

1. The proceedings were conducted in the Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal and the Decision was delivered after that Tribunal had been abolished. The provisions of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) (the Act) provide for proceedings which span both the abolished Tribunal and the new Tribunal to be conducted in the new Tribunal in the manner described in schedule 1 of the Act. In particular schedule 1 of the Act provides that part heard proceedings in a former Tribunal are to continue in the new Tribunal and that the new Tribunal has and may exercise all the functions that the relevant existing Tribunal had immediately before its abolition (see clause 7, subdivision 2, division 3 of schedule 1 of the Act), and that the provisions of any Act that would have applied had the Act and relevant amending Acts not been enacted continue…