In the matter of Recycling Holdings Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (deed administrator appointed) ACN 123 236 573 (No 3) [2015] NSWSC 2017

In the matter of Recycling Holdings Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (deed administrator appointed) ACN 123 236 573 (No 3) [2015] NSWSC 2017

The application for interlocutory relief was reasonable due to the fourth defendant's failure to comply with the notice to produce. The fourth defendant's recalcitrance caused the application, and thus, it should bear the costs of the interlocutory process.

Parties
First Plaintiff/first Applicant: Salmat Limited ACN 002 724 638; Second Plaintiff/second Applicant: Salmat Mediaforce Pty Limited ACN 001 702 129; Fuji Xerox Businessforce Pty Limited ACN 137 933 905; First Defendant: Recycling Holdings Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (deed administrator appointed) ACN 123 236 573; Second Defendants: Philip Raymond Hosking and David Anthony Hurst in their capacities as deed administrators of Recycling Holdings Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (deed administrator appointed) ACN 123 236 573; Third Defendant/second Respondent: Jason Kenneth Ryan; Fourth Defendant/first Respondent: Front Foot Project Funding Pty Limited ACN 601 976 346
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Equity / Interlocutory Application – Costs Order
Outcome
Interlocutory process dismissed; applicant awarded costs of the interlocutory process against the first respondent/fourth defendant.
Legal Topics
Costs, Interlocutory Relief, Notice to Produce
Civil Procedure Costs Interlocutory Relief Notice to Produce

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Salmat Limited ACN 002 724 638

First Plaintiff/first Applicant

Salmat Mediaforce Pty Limited ACN 001 702 129

Second Plaintiff/second Applicant

Fuji Xerox Businessforce Pty Limited ACN 137 933 905

Recycling Holdings Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (deed administrator appointed) ACN 123 236 573

First Defendant

Philip Raymond Hosking and David Anthony Hurst in their capacities as deed administrators of Recycling Holdings Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (deed administrator appointed) ACN 123 236 573

Second Defendants

Jason Kenneth Ryan

Third Defendant/second Respondent

Front Foot Project Funding Pty Limited ACN 601 976 346

Fourth Defendant/first Respondent

Procedural Posture

Equity / Interlocutory Application – Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant reasonably applied for interlocutory relief due to respondent's refusal to comply with notice to produce
  2. 2 Which party should bear the costs of the interlocutory process

Ratio Decidendi

The application for interlocutory relief was reasonable due to the fourth defendant's failure to comply with the notice to produce. The fourth defendant's recalcitrance caused the application, and thus, it should bear the costs of the interlocutory process.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory process dismissed; applicant awarded costs of the interlocutory process against the first respondent/fourth defendant.

Orders

  • The interlocutory process is dismissed.
  • The first respondent/fourth defendant is to pay the applicant's costs of the interlocutory process.