Retrospective legislation that validates the subject matter of litigation does not necessarily confirm that the primary judge's construction of the relevant provision was correct. A party who would have succeeded on the law as it stood at the time of the hearing may still be treated as the successful party for costs purposes, notwithstanding that intervening legislation has rendered the substantive relief unavailable. Where a party succeeds on the dominant issues but fails on other issues and abandons multiple grounds of appeal, costs may be apportioned accordingly.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.