ObjectiVision Pty Limited v Visionsearch Pty Limited (No 3) [2015] FCA 304

ObjectiVision Pty Limited v Visionsearch Pty Limited (No 3) [2015] FCA 304

Because the preliminary discovery application was contested and conducted adversarially, and ObjectiVision was largely successful, it was appropriate for ObjectiVision to receive a proportion of its application costs. However, given the extraordinary and intrusive nature of preliminary discovery, the need to protect highly confidential material, ObjectiVision's late amendment and partial success only, and its failure on the Licensing Agreement ground against the University, ObjectiVision should receive only 50% of its application costs. That liability should be apportioned 35% to Visionsearch and 15% to the University because their positions and manner of resisting the application...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Costs Decision Following Application for Preliminary Discovery Under R 7.23 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (cth) / Decided on the Papers After Judgment Allowing Preliminary Discovery in Part
Outcome
ObjectiVision was awarded 50% of its costs of the application for preliminary discovery, apportioned as 35% payable by Visionsearch and 15% payable by the University; ObjectiVision was ordered to pay the reasonable costs and expenses of the prospective respondents in giving discovery and production.
Legal Topics
['costs Discretion Under S 43(2) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (cth)' 'preliminary Discovery Under R 7.23 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (cth)' 'costs and Expenses of Compliance With Preliminary Discovery' 'contingent Costs Orders' 'apportionment of Costs Between Prospective Respondents']
['civil Procedure' 'costs' 'preliminary Discovery'] ['costs Discretion Under S 43(2) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (cth)' 'preliminary Discovery Under R 7.23 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (cth)' 'costs and Expenses of Compliance With Preliminary Discovery' 'contingent Costs Orders' 'apportionment of Costs Between Prospective Respondents']

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 Decision Following Application for Preliminary Discovery Under R 7.23 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (cth) / Decided on the Papers After Judgment Allowing Preliminary Discovery in Part

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the prospective applicant should receive any part of its costs of the application for preliminary discovery.' "What proportion of the prospective applicant's costs should be awarded." "Whether liability for the prospective applicant's costs should be apportioned between the two prospective respondents." 'Whether the prospective respondents should receive their costs and expenses of complying with the preliminary discovery order.' 'Whether contingent costs orders were appropriate.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the preliminary discovery application was contested and conducted adversarially, and ObjectiVision was largely successful, it was appropriate for ObjectiVision to receive a proportion of its application costs. However, given the extraordinary and intrusive nature of preliminary discovery, the need to protect highly confidential material, ObjectiVision's late amendment and partial success only, and its failure on the Licensing Agreement ground against the University, ObjectiVision should receive only 50% of its application costs. That liability should be apportioned 35% to Visionsearch and 15% to the University because their positions and manner of resisting the application...

Court Disposition

ObjectiVision was awarded 50% of its costs of the application for preliminary discovery, apportioned as 35% payable by Visionsearch and 15% payable by the University; ObjectiVision was ordered to pay the reasonable costs and expenses of the prospective respondents in giving discovery and production.

Orders

  • ["The prospective applicant is to pay the prospective first and second respondents' reasonable costs and expenses of giving discovery and production in compliance with the orders made on 27 October 2014." "The first prospective respondent is to pay thirty five percent (35%) of the prospective applicant's costs of...