Tzaneros Investments Pty Ltd v Walker Group Constructions Pty Ltd (No 4)

In the case of Tzaneros Investments Pty Ltd v Walker Group Constructions Pty Ltd, the dispute centered around whether the court should make a gross sum costs order in favour of the successful party. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiff, Tzaneros Investments Pty Ltd, sought an order for the defendant, Walker Group Constructions Pty Ltd, to pay costs on a gross sum basis, as opposed to the usual detailed assessment of costs. The defendant opposed the application, arguing that the court should not make a gross sum costs order due to the difficulties in making a fair assessment on such a basis and the impact of delay in making the application.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the circumstances justified a departure from the usual practice of assessing costs in detail. The court had to consider the principle that a party should not be penalised for delay in making an application for costs and whether the delay was such that it would prejudice the other party. Additionally, the court had to weigh the difficulties inherent in making a fair assessment on a gross sum basis against the benefits of expediency and finality that such an order might provide.

The court held that while gross sum costs orders were appropriate in certain cases, the delay in making the application in this instance was significant and had prejudiced the defendant. The court found that the delay made it difficult to accurately assess the costs incurred by the plaintiff and the extent to which the defendant had contributed to the delay. Consequently, the court determined that the circumstances did not warrant a gross sum costs order. Instead, the court ordered that the costs be assessed in detail, taking into account the delay and its impact on the proceedings.

In light of the court's decision, the final orders were that the application for a gross sum costs order was dismissed, and the costs of the proceeding were to be assessed in detail, with due regard to the delay in making the application. The court directed the parties to proceed with the detailed assessment of costs to ensure that the outcome was fair and just.