Brown v Rodgers, in the matter of Terry Donald Hill [2006] FCA 713

Brown v Rodgers, in the matter of Terry Donald Hill [2006] FCA 713

Although the respondents suffered some injustice from the applicants' late amendment and resulting adjournment, the further evidence and the precise pecuniary effect on the respondents were not yet sufficiently clear to make it just to fix or require taxation of a sum immediately. The appropriate order was that the applicants pay the respondents' costs thrown away by the amendment and the respondents' costs of 15 March 2006 in any event, but the application to fix a sum or require taxation at that stage was refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 March 2006
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Respondents' Application to Fix a Sum or Require Taxation of Costs After Leave to Amend Application and Adjournment
Outcome
Respondents' application to fix a sum or require taxation of costs at this stage refused; applicants ordered to pay specified costs.
Legal Topics
['costs Thrown Away by Amendment' 'adjournment' 'fixing Costs' 'taxation of Costs' 'leave to Amend']
['costs' 'civil Procedure'] ['costs Thrown Away by Amendment' 'adjournment' 'fixing Costs' 'taxation of Costs' 'leave to Amend']

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 Application / Respondents' Application to Fix a Sum or Require Taxation of Costs After Leave to Amend Application and Adjournment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicants should pay the respondents' costs thrown away by the amendment and costs of 15 March 2006." 'Whether the Court should fix a sum for those costs or require taxation of those costs at this stage.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the respondents suffered some injustice from the applicants' late amendment and resulting adjournment, the further evidence and the precise pecuniary effect on the respondents were not yet sufficiently clear to make it just to fix or require taxation of a sum immediately. The appropriate order was that the applicants pay the respondents' costs thrown away by the amendment and the respondents' costs of 15 March 2006 in any event, but the application to fix a sum or require taxation at that stage was refused.

Court Disposition

Respondents' application to fix a sum or require taxation of costs at this stage refused; applicants ordered to pay specified costs.

Orders

  • ["The applicants pay the respondents' costs thrown away by the amendment to the application foreshadowed today." "The applicants pay the respondents' costs of 15 March 2006 in any event." "The respondents' application to fix a sum or to require the taxation of those costs at this stage is refused."]