Cherry, Nicholas William John & Ors v Read, Brian & Ors [1996] FCA 815
Applicants had not established that the litigation would necessarily be prevented by an order for security for costs; the Court was not satisfied on the material that making such an order would stifle the litigation and exercised its discretion to order security for costs.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 15 August 1996
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Security for Costs / Interlocutory Decision
- Outcome
- Security for costs ordered; applicants' proceeding stayed until security provided
- Legal Topics
- ['security for Costs' 'impecuniosity' 'benefit From Litigation' 'discretionary Orders']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application for Security for Costs / Interlocutory Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether order for security for costs would stifle the litigation' 'Who stands to benefit from the litigation' 'Whether relevant parties are impecunious' 'Discretionary nature of security for costs order']
Ratio Decidendi
Applicants had not established that the litigation would necessarily be prevented by an order for security for costs; the Court was not satisfied on the material that making such an order would stifle the litigation and exercised its discretion to order security for costs.
Court Disposition
Security for costs ordered; applicants' proceeding stayed until security provided
Orders
- ['Applicants provide security for costs for first to fifth respondents ($100,000) and seventh respondent ($50,000)' 'Such security to be provided within 21 days and in a form acceptable to District Registrar' 'Proceeding stayed until security is provided, subject to further order' "Applicants to pay first to fifth...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment