Cetinkaya v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy [2012] FCA 611

Cetinkaya v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy [2012] FCA 611

The continuance of the appeal became futile as the Official Trustee declined to assign the County Court claim to any party, rendering the appeal redundant; none of the parties acted unreasonably in commencing or conducting the proceedings and there was no clear prospect of success for any party, so each party should bear their own costs and no adverse costs order is justified.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Post Discontinuance (costs Determination)
Outcome
No order as to costs; each party bears their own costs of the appeal.
Legal Topics
['costs on Discontinuance' 'discretion in Costs Orders' 'assignment of Claims in Bankruptcy']

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

Appeal / Post Discontinuance (costs Determination)

  1. 1 ['Who should bear the costs where an appeal is discontinued and the continuance of the proceedings has become futile?' 'Whether the operation of r 36.73(4) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 is determinative of costs after discontinuance of an appeal' 'Whether conduct of any party justifies an adverse costs order']

Ratio Decidendi

The continuance of the appeal became futile as the Official Trustee declined to assign the County Court claim to any party, rendering the appeal redundant; none of the parties acted unreasonably in commencing or conducting the proceedings and there was no clear prospect of success for any party, so each party should bear their own costs and no adverse costs order is justified.

Court Disposition

No order as to costs; each party bears their own costs of the appeal.

Orders

  • ['There be no order as to the costs of the appeal.']