Mansour t/as Quick Start Mechanical and Performance v Cilliers (No 2)
[2014] QDC 183
To print this judgment please return to the case and click on the PDF icon
next to the
case name. For court use, a full PDF copy is required or preferred.
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
Please Note: You are about to print a copy of the onscreen
version of
this judgment. For court use, a full PDF copy of the judgment is required or preferred. Please
return to
the case for PDF printing options.
- Unreported Judgment
- Mansour t/as Quick Start Mechanical and Performance v Cilliers (No 2)[2014] QDC 183
- Add to List
Mansour t/as Quick Start Mechanical and Performance v Cilliers (No 2)[2014] QDC 183
Mansour t/as Quick Start Mechanical and Performance v Cilliers (No 2)[2014] QDC 183
DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION: | Mansour t/as Quick Start Mechanical and Performance v Cilliers (No 2) [2014] QDC 183 |
PARTIES: | HAZIM MANSOUR T/AS QUICK START MECHANICAL AND PERFORMANCE (plaintiff) v RUSSEL WILLEM CILLIERS (defendant) |
FILE NO/S: | D93/2013 |
DIVISION: | Civil |
PROCEEDING: | Application |
ORIGINATING COURT: | Rockhampton |
DELIVERED ON: | 2 September 2014 |
DELIVERED AT: | Rockhampton |
HEARING DATE: | Hearing on the papers. Plaintiff’s submissions dated 29 August 2014. Defendant’s submissions dated 29 August 2014. |
JUDGE: | Smith DCJ |
ORDER: |
|
CATCHWORDS: | COSTS – Whether Plaintiff should pay 25% of costs or whether should be reserved costs Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Q) Rule 681 |
COUNSEL: | Submissions on the papers |
SOLICITORS: | Mr Mansour self-represented for the Plaintiff Anne Murray and Co for the Defendant |
- [1]This is the costs decision consequent upon the ruling made in Mansour t/as Quick Start Mechanical and Performance v Cilliers [2014] QDC 175.
- [2]The plaintiff submits:
- (a)He has properly particularised his claim for damages;
- (b)He has not received a response regarding settlement proposals;
- (c)The particulars in paragraph 6, 9, 10 and 11 are sufficient;
- (d)The court make an order preventing the defendant from selling or transferring property;
- (e)The matter be listed before trial.
- [3]The defendant submits:
- (a)That it was successful in obtaining an order for further and better particulars;
- (b)The order for particulars was necessary as previous requests had been made and were not complied with;
- (c)The defendant does not press for indemnity costs but submits the plaintiff should pay 25% of his costs on a standard basis;
- (d)Since judgment has been delivered a fourth amended statement of claim has been delivered and still there is no allowance for wages and entitlements payable to the defendant;
- (e)A timeframe for delivery of particulars should be given;
- (f)Further particulars of the plaintiff’s new pleading need to be resolved before the action can move forward.
- [4]Having considered all matters it seems to me appropriate to reserve the question of costs. I consider it appropriate to depart from the general rule (UCPR 681). Both parties were unsuccessful in their applications for summary judgment and the defendant was further unsuccessful with respect to the application for security for costs. It was successful concerning the particulars but that was only a small part of the argument.
- [5]With respect to the further and better particulars I have already made the orders requiring these. I order that the plaintiff provide the further and better particulars ordered in the judgment dated 22 August 2014 by 5.00 pm 15 September 2014.
- [6]There is insufficient material in order to make an order preventing the defendant from transferring his assets. Additionally until the pleadings are in order the matter is not ready to be listed for trial.
- [7]My orders are as follows:
- The costs of and incidental to the applications are reserved.
- I order the Plaintiff provide further and better particulars of his statement of claim by 5pm on 15 September 2014.