PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd v Baird [2018] NSWSC 1889

PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd v Baird [2018] NSWSC 1889

Delay in bringing the application for security for costs does not itself justify refusal when there is no resulting prejudice or unfairness to the plaintiff; given the plaintiff's inability to satisfy an adverse costs order and lack of prejudice from delay, security for costs is appropriate.

Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd; 2nd to 106th Defendant/applicant: David Baird and 104 others; 107th Defendant/applicant: Roads and Maritime Services; 108th Defendant/applicant: Minister administering the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Security for Costs Application in Ongoing Proceedings / Interlocutory Motion; Orders for Security for Costs
Outcome
Security for costs ordered; proceedings stayed pending compliance; ancillary orders made.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Delay in Application, Corporations
Civil Procedure Security for Costs Delay in Application Corporations

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd

Plaintiff/respondent

David Baird and 104 others

2nd to 106th Defendant/applicant

Roads and Maritime Services

107th Defendant/applicant

Minister administering the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

108th Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Security for Costs Application in Ongoing Proceedings / Interlocutory Motion; Orders for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered against the plaintiff
  2. 2 Whether delay in bringing the application should preclude security for costs

Ratio Decidendi

Delay in bringing the application for security for costs does not itself justify refusal when there is no resulting prejudice or unfairness to the plaintiff; given the plaintiff's inability to satisfy an adverse costs order and lack of prejudice from delay, security for costs is appropriate.

Court Disposition

Security for costs ordered; proceedings stayed pending compliance; ancillary orders made.

Orders

  • Plaintiff to provide security for costs of $400,000 for the 2nd to 106th defendants within 28 days.
  • Plaintiff to provide security for costs of $850,000 for the 107th and 108th defendants within 28 days.