Sunland Waterfront (BVI) Ltd v Prudentia Investments Pty Ltd (No 3) [2010] FCA 359

Sunland Waterfront (BVI) Ltd v Prudentia Investments Pty Ltd (No 3) [2010] FCA 359

Because the application was originally cast more widely and narrowed only on the hearing day, the applicants were put to unnecessary expense; although no special costs basis was justified, the ordinary costs-follow-the-event order should be made, with the first to third respondents liable up to 14 December 2009 and the third respondent liable from and including that date, and taxation deferred until the principal proceedings conclude.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application for Costs in Respect of an Anti Suit Injunction Application / Orders and Reasons on Costs of the Application Filed 1 December 2009
Outcome
Costs ordered for the applicants; costs to be taxed, but any bill of costs not to be taxed until the principal proceedings are concluded.
Legal Topics
['anti Suit Injunction' 'interlocutory Proceedings' 'costs Follow the Event' 'taxation of Costs']
['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['anti Suit Injunction' 'interlocutory Proceedings' 'costs Follow the Event' 'taxation of 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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application for Costs in Respect of an Anti Suit Injunction Application / Orders and Reasons on Costs of the Application Filed 1 December 2009

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicants should recover costs incurred because the anti-suit injunction application was originally cast more widely than ultimately pursued.' 'Whether the costs order should be an ordinary order for costs rather than a special costs order.' 'Whether taxation of the interlocutory costs should await conclusion of the principal proceedings.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the application was originally cast more widely and narrowed only on the hearing day, the applicants were put to unnecessary expense; although no special costs basis was justified, the ordinary costs-follow-the-event order should be made, with the first to third respondents liable up to 14 December 2009 and the third respondent liable from and including that date, and taxation deferred until the principal proceedings conclude.

Court Disposition

Costs ordered for the applicants; costs to be taxed, but any bill of costs not to be taxed until the principal proceedings are concluded.

Orders

  • ["The first to third respondents pay the applicants' costs of and incidental to the application filed 1 December 2009 up to 14 December 2009." "The third respondent pay the applicants' costs of and incidental to the application from and including 14 December 2009." 'Such costs to be taxed.' 'Any such bill of costs...