Read the full judgment text of CACV 000062/1995 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 13 December 1995 before Litton, V.P., Godfrey, J.A. & Ryan, J..
Civil procedure – costs – exercise of discretion – summary judgment under O.14 of the Rules of the Supreme Court – costs of O.14 proceedings and subsequent appeal left unresolved when payment into court by co-defendants moots the action – O.22 r.4 application for payment out and disposal of the whole costs of the action – management company engaged as building manager – multi-ownership building – workmen dismissed by manager – claim for severance pay and long service payments – whether Master's order for costs in any event against manager in O.14 proceedings should be confirmed – held, the Master's award of costs depended on the nature of the application and the circumstances, and was within his discretion – whether manager should pay workmen's costs of abandoned appeal from Master's order – held, yes, with a certificate for two counsel, following J.T. Stratford & Son Ltd v. Lindley (No. 2) – it is absurd for a case to continue merely about costs left 'dangling in the air' when the trial will not take place – whether no order for costs should be made on the payment-out application as between workmen and manager – held, yes, a proper exercise of discretion – leave to appeal granted by Leong, J. on 24 February 1995 – appeal and cross-appeal dismissed – Court of Appeal will rarely interfere with High Court judge's exercise of discretion under O.22 r.4.
Legal issues: Confirmation of Master's costs order in O.14 summary judgment proceedings · Costs of the appeal against the Master's O.14 order · No order as to costs of the payment-out application before the judge
Outcome: Appeal and cross-appeal both dismissed; the three costs orders made by Leong, J. on 24 February 1995 were upheld.