Transcript Of Proceedings

[2020] HCATrans 20

[2020] HCATrans 020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Adelaide  No A17 of 2017

B e t w e e n -

MAXCON CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD

Appellant

and

MICHAEL CHRISTOPHER VADASZ (TRADING AS AUSTRALASIAN PILING COMPANY)

First Respondent

ADJUDICATE TODAY PTY LTD

Second Respondent

CALLUM CAMPBELL

Third Respondent

KEANE J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

FROM BRISBANE BY VIDEO LINK TO SYDNEY AND MELBOURNE

ON MONDAY, 24 FEBRUARY 2020, AT 9.34 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

MR M.J. GALVIN, QC:   May it please the Court, I appear for Maxcon.  (instructed by Diakou Faigen)

MR M. CHRISTIE, SC:   May it please your Honour, I appear with my learned friends, MR D.P. HUME and MS A.A. LYONS, for Mr Vadasz.  (instructed by O’Loughlins Lawyers)

HIS HONOUR:   Gentlemen, what is the situation, so far as payment is concerned?  Mr Christie?

MR CHRISTIE:   Yes, your Honour.  Just after 3.00 pm, my solicitor obtained confirmation that the amount in question was received into his trust account.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes.  I take it that your client wishes to persist with the application, notwithstanding that payment?

MR CHRISTIE:   No, it does not, your Honour.  All it seeks now is to press proposed order 3 of the amended summons, which is that Maxcon pay my client’s costs on an indemnity basis for this application, without any set‑off.

HIS HONOUR:   Very well.  Mr Galvin, what is your position?

MR GALVIN:   Our position, your Honour, is that if the matter is to proceed we would be seeking an adjournment.  The amount that has been paid, in fact, I think exceeds by some $4,500 the amount that was due.  We would have no opposition to paying the costs of our learned friend’s client on an indemnity basis.  That would not be resisted.  We are in your Honour’s hands.  I understand the application is not being pressed.  We would ask that the matter be dismissed today with an appropriate order for costs.  If, however, your Honour is of a mind that the matter should proceed, then we would seek an adjournment.

HIS HONOUR:   As I understand Mr Christie, his client would – as I understand him, the only order his client seeks is an order that your client pay today’s costs on an indemnity basis.

MR GALVIN:   Yes.

HIS HONOUR:   Am I right in that, Mr Christie?

MR CHRISTIE:   Yes, your Honour.  Proposed order 3 is that Maxcon pays, without any set‑off, my client’s costs on an indemnity basis for this application.

HIS HONOUR:   Mr Galvin, am I sensing that you are content to consent to that order?

MR GALVIN:   Absolutely, your Honour, yes.

HIS HONOUR:   In that happy event, I would be disposed to make that order and otherwise dismiss the application.

MR GALVIN:   If it please, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:   Mr Christie, are you content with that?

MR CHRISTIE:   Yes, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:   Very well.  In that event I order that the appellant pay the costs of the first respondent of this application on an indemnity basis without set‑off.  Otherwise, I order that the application commenced by summons filed on 9 December 2019 be dismissed.

MR CHRISTIE:   Your Honour, it is actually the amended summons filed on 13 December.

HIS HONOUR:   Very well, the amended summons.  I order that the amended summons filed on 13 December 2019 be dismissed.  Otherwise I make the order for costs that I have indicated.

MR CHRISTIE:   May it please the Court.

HIS HONOUR:   Thank you gentlemen.  Adjourn the Court, please.

AT 9.38 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED