Coshott v Coshott (No 2) [2019] FCA 403

Coshott v Coshott (No 2) [2019] FCA 403

Because Mrs Coshott's opposition to payment out of Court and to a further garnishee order was clearly devoid of merit, she filed no material opposing indemnity costs, and the applicants' identified circumstances individually and collectively justified departure from the ordinary costs rule, Mrs Coshott was ordered to pay Messrs Barry and Board indemnity costs in the lump sums determined by the Registrar; Mr Prentice, who did not seek indemnity costs, received an ordinary costs order.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Costs on Interlocutory Applications / Determined on the Papers After Interlocutory Judgment
Outcome
Indemnity costs ordered for Messrs Barry and Board and Mr Barry; ordinary costs ordered for Mr Prentice.
Legal Topics
['indemnity Costs' 'party/party Costs' 'lump Sum Costs' 'garnishee Orders' 'payment Out of Court']
['costs' 'commercial and Corporations' 'general and Personal Insolvency'] ['indemnity Costs' 'party/party Costs' 'lump Sum Costs' 'garnishee Orders' 'payment Out of Court']

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 on Interlocutory Applications / Determined on the Papers After Interlocutory Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the interlocutory applicants should receive indemnity costs for successful interlocutory applications.' 'What lump-sum amounts should be ordered for the costs of the joint and individual interlocutory applications.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because Mrs Coshott's opposition to payment out of Court and to a further garnishee order was clearly devoid of merit, she filed no material opposing indemnity costs, and the applicants' identified circumstances individually and collectively justified departure from the ordinary costs rule, Mrs Coshott was ordered to pay Messrs Barry and Board indemnity costs in the lump sums determined by the Registrar; Mr Prentice, who did not seek indemnity costs, received an ordinary costs order.

Court Disposition

Indemnity costs ordered for Messrs Barry and Board and Mr Barry; ordinary costs ordered for Mr Prentice.

Orders

  • ['The interlocutory respondent, Mrs Coshott, pay the interlocutory applicant, Mr Prentice, his costs of and incidental to his interlocutory application.' 'The interlocutory respondent, Mrs Coshott, pay the interlocutory applicants, Messrs Barry and Board, the sum of $15,377.97 in respect of their joint interlocutory...