Directed Electronics OE Pty Ltd v Isuzu Australia Limited (No 3) [2024] FCA 1413

Directed Electronics OE Pty Ltd v Isuzu Australia Limited (No 3) [2024] FCA 1413

The applicants, having succeeded in opposing the respondent's interlocutory application, are entitled to costs of and incidental to the application on a party-party basis; costs associated with reviewing and considering the Iles Affidavit, improperly filed contrary to court direction, are to be paid on an indemnity basis. These costs should be determined immediately by a Registrar on a lump sum basis and paid forthwith. However, given recent appeal proceedings, the orders are stayed pending determination of the appeal.

Parties
First Applicant: Directed Electronics OE Pty Ltd; Second Applicant: Directed Electronics NZ Limited; First Respondent: Isuzu Australia Limited; Second Respondent: Johnny Meneses; Third Respondent: Kichang (Ryan) Lee; Fourth Respondent: Hanhwa Hightech Co., Ltd; Fifth Respondent: Leemen Co. Ltd; Sixth Respondent: Hanhwa AUS Pty Ltd (In Liquidation)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application in Civil Proceeding / Costs Determination Following Dismissal of Interlocutory Stay Application
Outcome
Costs awarded to the applicants; indemnity costs for specific item; orders stayed pending appeal outcome.
Legal Topics
Costs of Interlocutory Applications, Indemnity Costs, Party Party Costs, Costs Payable Forthwith, Case Management
Practice and Procedure Costs Costs of Interlocutory Applications Indemnity Costs Party Party Costs Costs Payable Forthwith Case Management

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 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Directed Electronics OE Pty Ltd

First Applicant

Directed Electronics NZ Limited

Second Applicant

Isuzu Australia Limited

First Respondent

Johnny Meneses

Second Respondent

Kichang (Ryan) Lee

Third Respondent

Hanhwa Hightech Co., Ltd

Fourth Respondent

Leemen Co. Ltd

Fifth Respondent

Hanhwa AUS Pty Ltd (In Liquidation)

Sixth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application in Civil Proceeding / Costs Determination Following Dismissal of Interlocutory Stay Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should follow the event or be costs in the cause for a failed interlocutory stay application
  2. 2 Whether conduct of the first respondent warrants the award of indemnity costs
  3. 3 Whether costs should be payable forthwith

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants, having succeeded in opposing the respondent's interlocutory application, are entitled to costs of and incidental to the application on a party-party basis; costs associated with reviewing and considering the Iles Affidavit, improperly filed contrary to court direction, are to be paid on an indemnity basis. These costs should be determined immediately by a Registrar on a lump sum basis and paid forthwith. However, given recent appeal proceedings, the orders are stayed pending determination of the appeal.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to the applicants; indemnity costs for specific item; orders stayed pending appeal outcome.

Orders

  • The first respondent pay the applicants’ costs of and incidental to its interlocutory application dated 22 June 2021 on a party party basis;
  • The first respondent pay the applicants’ costs of reviewing and considering the affidavit of Ms Emma Lee-Anne Iles affirmed 2 August 2024 on an indemnity basis;