Court of Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
- Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: Zepinic v Chateau Constructions (Australia) Ltd (No 2) [2013] NSWCA 227 Hearing dates: 1 July 2013 Decision date: 18 July 2013 Before: McColl JA Decision: 1. Dismiss the amended notice of motion.
2. No order for costs.
[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]
Catchwords: COSTS - interest on costs - s 101(4) Civil Procedure Act 2005 - whether interest on costs must be sought at time of judgment or within time limited by UCPR 36.16 - UCPR 36.4 Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005
Common Law Procedure Act 1899
Courts Legislation Further Amendment Act 1995
District Court Act 1973
Legal Profession Act 1987
Legal Profession Act 2004
Legal Profession Reform Act 1993
Real Property Act 1900
Supreme Court Act 1970Judgments Act 1838 (1 & 2 Vic c110)
New South Wales Government Gazette, No 170, 9 December 1983Cases Cited: Chateau Constructions (Aust) Ltd v Zepinic [2009] NSWSC 1339
Chateau Constructions (Aust) Ltd v Zepinic [2013] NSWSC 909
Chateau Constructions (Aust) Ltd v Zepinic [No 5] [2010] NSWSC 265
Craine v Colonial Mutual Fire Insurance Co Ltd [1923] VLR 623
D'Orta-Ekenaike v Victoria Legal Aid [2005] HCA 12; (2005) 223 CLR 1
Doyle v Hall Chadwick [2007] NSWCA 159
Drummond & Rosen Pty Ltd v Easey [2009] NSWCA 74
Drummond & Rosen Pty Ltd v Easey [No 2] [2009] NSWCA 331
Evans v European Bank Ltd (No 2) [2009] NSWCA 170
Fischer v David Syme & Co Ltd (1989) 18 NSWLR 606
Flower & Hart (a firm) v White Industries (Qld) Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 370; (2001) 109 FCR 280
Frumar v The Owners of Strata Plan 36957 [2010] NSWCA 172
Hunt v R M Douglas (Roofing) Ltd [1990] 1 AC 398
Lahoud v Lahoud [2006] NSWSC 126
Lahoud v Lahoud [2011] NSWSC 994
Leda Pty Ltd v Weerden (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 283
Lucantonio v Kleinert (Costs) [2011] NSWSC 1642
McWilliams Wines Pty Ltd v Liaweena (NSW) Pty Ltd (1993) 32 NSWLR 190
Minister administering the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 v Carson (1994) 35 NSWLR 342
Nykredit Mortgage Bank plc v Edward Erdman Group Ltd (No 2) [1998] 1 All ER 305
Re North Sydney Investment and Tramway Co Ltd (1897) 18 LR (NSW) (Eq) 50
Reis v Carling [1908] HCA 25; (1908) 5 CLR 673
Spedding v Nobles (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 87
T A Field Pty Ltd v Frigmobile of Australia Pty Ltd [1978] 2 NSWLR 488
Thomas v Bunn [1991] 1 AC 362
Timms v Commonwealth Bank…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Zepinic v Chateau Constructions (Australia) Ltd (No 2) and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2013] NSWCA 227
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether an application for interest on costs, pursuant to s 101(4) of the *Civil Procedure Act 2005* (NSW), must be made at the time of the original judgment or order, or if it could be made within the time limited by Rule 36.16 of the *Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005* (NSW) for setting aside or varying judgments or orders.
McColl JA determined that the application for interest on costs under s 101(4) of the *Civil Procedure Act 2005* was not an application to set aside or vary a judgment or order within the meaning of Rule 36.16 of the *Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005*. Therefore, the time limit prescribed by Rule 36.16 did not apply to such an application. However, the court noted that the plaintiff had not sought interest on costs at the time of the original judgment.
The amended notice of motion was dismissed, and no order was made for costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Dismiss the amended notice of motion.
2. No order for costs.
[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.