GG Australia Pty Ltd v Sphere Projects Pty Ltd (No 3) [2017] FCA 1631

GG Australia Pty Ltd v Sphere Projects Pty Ltd (No 3) [2017] FCA 1631

The explanation for the respondents' delay in filing the amended defence was inadequate, constituting a lack of diligence and justifying an order that costs thrown away by reason of the amendments be paid by the respondents on an indemnity basis from 13 May 2016.

Parties
First Applicant: GG Australia Pty Ltd; Second Applicant: GG Townsville Pty Ltd; Third Applicant: GG Tuggeranong Pty Ltd; Fourth Applicant: Leigh Taylforth; First Respondent: Sphere Projects Pty Ltd; Second Respondent: Zoran Sever
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application in Existing Commercial Dispute / Costs Order After Amendment of Defence, Interlocutory Stage
Outcome
Respondents granted leave to rely on amended defence; respondents to pay applicants' costs thrown away by reason of amendments on an indemnity basis from 13 May 2016; various interlocutory directions made.
Legal Topics
Costs, Pleadings, Amendment of Defence, Indemnity Costs
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Costs Pleadings Amendment of Defence Indemnity 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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GG Australia Pty Ltd

First Applicant

GG Townsville Pty Ltd

Second Applicant

GG Tuggeranong Pty Ltd

Third Applicant

Leigh Taylforth

Fourth Applicant

Sphere Projects Pty Ltd

First Respondent

Zoran Sever

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application in Existing Commercial Dispute / Costs Order After Amendment of Defence, Interlocutory Stage

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondents should pay applicants' costs thrown away by reason of amendment to defence on an indemnity basis.
  2. 2 Whether delay in amending defence justified indemnity costs order.

Ratio Decidendi

The explanation for the respondents' delay in filing the amended defence was inadequate, constituting a lack of diligence and justifying an order that costs thrown away by reason of the amendments be paid by the respondents on an indemnity basis from 13 May 2016.

Court Disposition

Respondents granted leave to rely on amended defence; respondents to pay applicants' costs thrown away by reason of amendments on an indemnity basis from 13 May 2016; various interlocutory directions made.

Orders

  • The respondents are granted leave to rely on the amended defence filed on 20 September 2017.
  • The respondents are to pay the applicants' costs thrown away by reason of the amendments, those costs to be payable on an indemnity basis from 13 May 2016.