Osborne v Gangemi (No 3) [2012] FCA 188

Osborne v Gangemi (No 3) [2012] FCA 188

The Trustees were not entitled to costs because no specific allegation of wrongdoing was made against them or their staff, there was no proper foundation for assuming Osborne and Jafari adopted such allegations, the continuing applicants were successful, and the Trustees identified no additional costs caused by Lanciana before his withdrawal beyond costs they continued to rely upon in unsuccessfully opposing the application.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Costs Application Following Application to Set Aside a Personal Insolvency Agreement Under Part X of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (cth) / Heard on the Papers; Reserved Question of Costs After Orders Made on 4 November 2011
Outcome
The second and third respondents' application for costs was dismissed.
Legal Topics
['personal Insolvency Agreement' "trustees' Costs" 'costs Against a Successful Party' 'costs Against a Former Applicant']
['bankruptcy' 'costs'] ['personal Insolvency Agreement' "trustees' Costs" 'costs Against a Successful Party' 'costs Against a Former Applicant']

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 Following Application to Set Aside a Personal Insolvency Agreement Under Part X of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (cth) / Heard on the Papers; Reserved Question of Costs After Orders Made on 4 November 2011

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the second and third respondents should recover costs from Pasquale Lanciana after he commenced the application but withdrew as an applicant.' 'Whether the second and third respondents should recover costs from Osborne and Jafari on the basis that allegations were made or adopted against the Trustees and their staff.' 'Whether there was sufficient reason to order successful applicants to pay costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Trustees were not entitled to costs because no specific allegation of wrongdoing was made against them or their staff, there was no proper foundation for assuming Osborne and Jafari adopted such allegations, the continuing applicants were successful, and the Trustees identified no additional costs caused by Lanciana before his withdrawal beyond costs they continued to rely upon in unsuccessfully opposing the application.

Court Disposition

The second and third respondents' application for costs was dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application of the second and third respondents for costs be dismissed.' "The second and third respondents pay the applicants' costs of the application and those of Pasquale Lanciana."]