15 Management Pty Ltd v Newstar Sports Management Pty Ltd & Ors [2009] NSWSC 1208

15 Management Pty Ltd v Newstar Sports Management Pty Ltd & Ors [2009] NSWSC 1208

The court was not provided with objective evidence of the plaintiff’s current financial position or actual revenue, and the unexplained absence of financial statements and taxation returns for several years justifies a real chance the plaintiff will be unable to pay an adverse costs order at the end of the proceedings. This satisfies the statutory and rule-based precondition for a security order, and there are no discretionary circumstances outweighing the making of such an order.

Parties
Plaintiff: 15 Management Pty Ltd; First Defendant: Newstar Sports Management Pty Ltd; Second Defendant: Anthony Piccone; Third Defendant: Teruaki Kita
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Application for Security for Costs / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Security for costs ordered against the plaintiff.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Corporate Plaintiffs, Discretionary Factors, Delay and Prejudice, Ability to Pay Costs
Practice and Procedure Civil Procedure Security for Costs Corporate Plaintiffs Discretionary Factors Delay and Prejudice Ability to Pay Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 15
Sign in to unlock

Parties

15 Management Pty Ltd

Plaintiff

Newstar Sports Management Pty Ltd

First Defendant

Anthony Piccone

Second Defendant

Teruaki Kita

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Security for Costs / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff corporation will be unable to pay the costs of the defendants if ordered to do so
  2. 2 Whether the court's discretion should be exercised to order security for costs

Ratio Decidendi

The court was not provided with objective evidence of the plaintiff’s current financial position or actual revenue, and the unexplained absence of financial statements and taxation returns for several years justifies a real chance the plaintiff will be unable to pay an adverse costs order at the end of the proceedings. This satisfies the statutory and rule-based precondition for a security order, and there are no discretionary circumstances outweighing the making of such an order.

Court Disposition

Security for costs ordered against the plaintiff.

Orders

  • The plaintiff provide security for the defendants' costs of the proceedings in the sum of $165,000, to be paid in four instalments of $41,250 to the defendants' solicitors by specified dates; failing which the proceedings be stayed until further order.
  • The plaintiff to pay the defendants' costs of the application.