Homeloan Refunds Pty Ltd ACN 104 659 243 v Universal Integrity Pty Ltd ACN 110 731 238 [2010] FCA 728

The Court declined the application because, although there was cause for further inquiry into the second applicant's financial position, it was not satisfied that there was good reason to fear that an order for costs would not be satisfied, and because the application for security was brought too late in the circumstances of the expedited timetable.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 08 July 2010
Procedural Posture: Application for Security for Costs / Notice of Motion Heard Before Trial
Outcome: Application for security for costs declined.
Legal Topics: ['security for Costs' 'delay in Bringing Interlocutory Application' "corporate Applicant's Capacity to Pay Costs"]

['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['security for Costs' 'delay in Bringing Interlocutory Application' "corporate Applicant's Capacity to Pay Costs"]

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1

Procedural Posture

Application for Security for Costs / Notice of Motion Heard Before Trial

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether circumstances were such that an order for security for costs ought to be made.' "Whether there was reason to believe that the first and second applicants would be unable to pay the respondents' costs if the respondents successfully defended the proceeding." 'Whether delay in bringing the security for costs application warranted refusal of the application.']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs declined.

Orders

['The application for security for costs is declined.' 'Costs of the application are costs in the cause.']