A successful appellant may be denied costs where leave to appeal was granted only as an indulgence because of the general importance of the legal point, and the underlying proceeding involved inappropriate fragmentation of proceedings in an inferior court. The fact that a case raises a point of general importance does not necessarily justify departure from the usual costs rule, but equally does not entitle the successful party to costs where the proceeding should not have been brought in the form it was.
The full text is available to signed-in members.