W & E (Costs)

This matter concerned an application for costs by the respondent, W, against the applicant, E, following the dismissal of E's application for an interlocutory injunction. The dispute arose from a proposed development by W, which E sought to restrain.

The primary legal issue before Warnick J was whether E should be ordered to pay W's costs of the interlocutory application, notwithstanding that E had been granted leave to appeal the decision dismissing its application. The court was required to consider the principles governing the award of costs in interlocutory proceedings, particularly in circumstances where a party is granted leave to appeal.

Warnick J reasoned that the general rule that costs follow the event applied to interlocutory applications. His Honour noted that the grant of leave to appeal did not automatically suspend or alter the usual order for costs. The court considered that E had failed to establish a sufficient basis for the interlocutory injunction, and therefore, W had been successful on the substantive application. Accordingly, the court found no reason to depart from the usual order.

The court ordered that E pay the costs of W in relation to the dismissed interlocutory application.