Gadsden v MacKinnon (Liquidator), in the matter of Allibi Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 2) [2023] FCA 706

Gadsden v MacKinnon (Liquidator), in the matter of Allibi Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 2) [2023] FCA 706

Because the plaintiffs succeeded in obtaining removal orders but failed on, or abandoned at the last moment, a number of alternative grounds, it was appropriate to apportion costs on a broadbrush basis to reflect the unsuccessful or unpressed grounds and the time and expense taken in addressing them; the defendants were ordered to pay 50% of the plaintiffs' costs of the proceeding.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Costs in a Corporations and Corporate Insolvency Proceeding Concerning Removal of External Administrators / Determined on the Papers After Orders Removing the First and Second Defendants as External Administrators
Outcome
Costs apportioned; defendants ordered to pay 50% of the plaintiffs' costs of the proceeding.
Legal Topics
['costs Discretion' 'apportionment of Costs' 'removal of External Administrators' 'liquidators']
['costs' 'corporations' 'corporate Insolvency'] ['costs Discretion' 'apportionment of Costs' 'removal of External Administrators' 'liquidators']

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

Costs in a Corporations and Corporate Insolvency Proceeding Concerning Removal of External Administrators / Determined on the Papers After Orders Removing the First and Second Defendants as External Administrators

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the removed liquidators should pay the plaintiffs' costs of the proceeding on a lump sum basis." 'Whether there should be no order as to costs or an apportionment of costs because the plaintiffs failed on, or abandoned, multiple grounds.' "What proportion of the plaintiffs' costs the defendants should pay in light of the mixed outcome."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because the plaintiffs succeeded in obtaining removal orders but failed on, or abandoned at the last moment, a number of alternative grounds, it was appropriate to apportion costs on a broadbrush basis to reflect the unsuccessful or unpressed grounds and the time and expense taken in addressing them; the defendants were ordered to pay 50% of the plaintiffs' costs of the proceeding.

Court Disposition

Costs apportioned; defendants ordered to pay 50% of the plaintiffs' costs of the proceeding.

Orders

  • ["The defendants pay 50% of the plaintiffs' costs of the proceeding."]