Ruth Higgins SC, Stewart Webster KC, Bianca Kabel and Bianca Fernandez appeared for the respondent, instructed by Clayton Utz.
This judgement concerned a costs order following a judgment delivered on 16 February 2026 in respect of a strike out application. The issue was whether some order other than the usual order as to costs is more appropriate. The Court held that the proper exercise of the costs discretion involves ordering the defendants to pay 60 per cent of the plaintiff’s costs of and incidental to the application on the standard basis. The defendants were also ordered to pay the plaintiffs’ costs thrown away by reason of any amendments made pursuant to the leave granted on 16 February 2026, to be assessed on the standard basis if not agreed, and such costs, unless otherwise agreed by the parties, are to be neither assessed nor recovered until the proceeding ends.
The judgment can be read by clicking here
