Veesaunt Property Syndicate 1 Pty Ltd v Alliance Building and Construction Pty Ltd (No 2)

[2023] QSC 161

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Veesaunt Property Syndicate 1 Pty Ltd v Alliance Building and Construction Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] QSC 161

PARTIES:

VEESAUNT PROPERTY SYNDICATE 1 PTY LTD

(applicant)
v

ALLIANCE BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION PTY LTD

(respondent)

FILENO/S:

BS 14468 of 2022

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVEREDON:

18 July 2023

DELIVEREDAT:

Brisbane

HEARINGDATE:

Heard on the papers

JUDGE:

Brown J

ORDER:

The respondent pay the applicant’s costs on the standard basis, to be agreed or assessed.

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – COSTS – GENERAL RULE: COSTS FOLLOW EVENT – GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND

EXERCISE OF DISCRETION – where the applicant applied for various declarations in relation to a contract for the construction of residential townhouses – where the applicant was ultimately successful albeit that it did not succeed on all arguments raised – where orders were made for the parties to file and serve submissions as to costs within seven days of the date of judgment – where no submissions were received from the respondent – whether an order for costs should be made in the applicant’s favour

Oshlack v Richmond River Council (1998) 193 CLR 72

SOLICITORS:

Shand Taylor Lawyers for the applicant CDI Lawyers for the respondent

2

1. In relation to this matter, Veesaunt Property Syndicate 1 Pty Ltd (Veesaunt) was ultimately successful in its application for declarations albeit that it did not succeed on all arguments raised. Veesaunt sought its costs of the application on a standard basis on the basis that costs should follow the event. Orders were made on 14 June 2023 for Alliance Building and Construction Pty Ltd (Alliance) to provide submissions within seven days in relation to costs so the Court could determine the question of costs on the papers. No submissions were received. Veesaunt requested that the Court make an order in respect of costs on the papers and in its favour. Alliance was informed on 12 July 2023 that the Court would proceed to determine the question of costs on the papers. Notwithstanding that, no submissions were received by the Court from Alliance. Consistent with the principles outlined by the McHugh J in Oshlack v Richmond River Council,¹ costs should follow the event, notwithstanding Veesaunt did not succeed on all arguments raised given it was successful overall and the issues upon which it was unsuccessful were necessarily intertwined with the issue upon which it was successful and did not materially expand the hearing.

1. (1998) 193 CLR 72 at 97. As to which see McMurdo J in AGL Sales (Qld) Pty Ltd v Dawson Sales Pty Ltd (No 2) [2009] QSC 75 at [16].