Felkro Nominees Pty Ltd & Anor v Commonwealth of Australia & Anor [1998] FCA 1612

Felkro Nominees Pty Ltd & Anor v Commonwealth of Australia & Anor [1998] FCA 1612

The application for stay or dismissal failed because Precious Metal, as mortgagee and secured creditor, had a genuine commercial interest in the assigned cause of action pursued against the respondents. The indemnity arrangement with Norton Vale did not constitute unlawful maintenance. Leave under s 471B was not required since the proceedings did not relate to the property of a company in liquidation, and the authority for the solicitor's filing was effective retrospectively. Security for costs in the sum of $20,000 was warranted given standard practice and risks.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 December 1998
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Ruling on Motion for Stay or Dismissal, and Security for Costs
Outcome
Application for stay or dismissal refused; security for costs ordered; further orders about costs possible; respondents' motion otherwise dismissed.
Legal Topics
['maintenance and Champerty' 'assignment of Chose in Action' 'security for Costs' 'authority to Act in Proceedings' 'liquidation of Companies']
['civil Procedure' 'corporations Law' 'equity'] ['maintenance and Champerty' 'assignment of Chose in Action' 'security for Costs' 'authority to Act in Proceedings' 'liquidation of Companies']

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

Interlocutory Application / Ruling on Motion for Stay or Dismissal, and Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicants’ claim should be dismissed or stayed for want of authority or for maintenance/champerty' 'Whether leave under s 471B of the Corporations Law was required to proceed' 'Whether a valid assignment of a cause of action was made to an entity with a genuine commercial interest' "Whether authority for solicitors' actions could be given retrospectively" 'Entitlement to security for costs']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for stay or dismissal failed because Precious Metal, as mortgagee and secured creditor, had a genuine commercial interest in the assigned cause of action pursued against the respondents. The indemnity arrangement with Norton Vale did not constitute unlawful maintenance. Leave under s 471B was not required since the proceedings did not relate to the property of a company in liquidation, and the authority for the solicitor's filing was effective retrospectively. Security for costs in the sum of $20,000 was warranted given standard practice and risks.

Court Disposition

Application for stay or dismissal refused; security for costs ordered; further orders about costs possible; respondents' motion otherwise dismissed.

Orders

  • ["Applicants to provide security in the sum of $20,000 for respondents' costs within 28 days." 'The application is stayed until security is provided.' "Costs of all parties of and incidental to the respondents' motion on notice dated 16 March 1998 be costs in the cause, subject to further written contentions to be...