Wigmans v AMP Ltd; Fernbrook (Aust) Investments Pty Ltd v AMP Ltd; Wileypark Pty Ltd v AMP Ltd; Georgiou v AMP Ltd; Komlotex Pty Ltd v AMP Ltd [2019] NSWSC 814

Wigmans v AMP Ltd; Fernbrook (Aust) Investments Pty Ltd v AMP Ltd; Wileypark Pty Ltd v AMP Ltd; Georgiou v AMP Ltd; Komlotex Pty Ltd v AMP Ltd [2019] NSWSC 814

In the unusual circumstances of multiple representative proceedings covering broadly the same issues, arising out of the same factual circumstances, with overlapping class members and against the same defendant, the circumstances in which costs of steps taken in one set of proceedings were incurred may be relevant to the ultimate decision as to costs. It was therefore appropriate to reserve the costs of preparation of the Wileypark proceeding leading up to the hearing of the multiplicity motions, but there should be no order as to the costs of preparation for and hearing of the multiplicity motions themselves, so that Wileypark and AMP each bear their own costs of those motions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Open Class Representative Proceedings; Multiplicity Motions / Costs Determination on the Papers After Consolidation and Stay Orders
Outcome
Costs orders made in relation to the multiplicity motions; Wileypark Pty Ltd obtained reservation only of preparation costs, not costs of preparation for and attendance at the multiplicity motions.
Legal Topics
['multiplicity of Proceedings' 'costs Orders' 'consolidation of Representative Proceedings' 'stay of Representative Proceedings']
['civil Procedure' 'representative Proceedings' 'costs'] ['multiplicity of Proceedings' 'costs Orders' 'consolidation of Representative Proceedings' 'stay of Representative Proceedings']

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

Open Class Representative Proceedings; Multiplicity Motions / Costs Determination on the Papers After Consolidation and Stay Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What costs orders should be made in relation to the multiplicity motions heard on 6-7 December 2018.' "Whether Wileypark Pty Ltd's costs of and incidental to the multiplicity motions should be reserved." 'Whether costs of preparation of the Wileypark Pty Ltd proceeding leading up to the hearing of the multiplicity motions should be reserved.']

Ratio Decidendi

In the unusual circumstances of multiple representative proceedings covering broadly the same issues, arising out of the same factual circumstances, with overlapping class members and against the same defendant, the circumstances in which costs of steps taken in one set of proceedings were incurred may be relevant to the ultimate decision as to costs. It was therefore appropriate to reserve the costs of preparation of the Wileypark proceeding leading up to the hearing of the multiplicity motions, but there should be no order as to the costs of preparation for and hearing of the multiplicity motions themselves, so that Wileypark and AMP each bear their own costs of those motions.

Court Disposition

Costs orders made in relation to the multiplicity motions; Wileypark Pty Ltd obtained reservation only of preparation costs, not costs of preparation for and attendance at the multiplicity motions.

Orders

  • ['In relation to the multiplicity motions heard on 6-7 December 2018, costs of Komlotex Pty Ltd and Fernbrook (Aust) Investments Pty Ltd and of the defendant (AMP Limited) be costs in the cause in the ongoing consolidated Komlotex/Fernbrook proceeding.' 'Save as provided in Order 3 below, order that there be no...