AON Services Aust Pty Ltd v Impact Edge Pty Ltd [2009] NSWDC 76

AON Services Aust Pty Ltd v Impact Edge Pty Ltd [2009] NSWDC 76

Impact Edge Pty Ltd admitted impecuniosity through its solicitor and director, and the court was satisfied it could not meet an adverse costs order on the cross-claim. The evidence did not establish sufficient prejudice from delay, the notice to produce issue was not substantial, and the material from Impact did not persuade the court that security should be refused. Given the disparity between AON's claim and Impact's much larger cross-claim, and Impact's admitted inability to meet costs if unsuccessful, security for costs was ordered.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 April 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Proceeding Concerning a Notice of Motion for Security for Costs on a Cross Claim / Judgment on Notice of Motion for Security for Costs on the Cross Claim
Outcome
AON Services Aust Ltd's motion for security for costs was granted; proceedings on the cross-claim were stayed until security was provided or the parties agreed otherwise; costs were reserved.
Legal Topics
['security for Costs' 'cross Claim' 'corporate Impecuniosity' 'stay of Proceedings']
['civil Procedure'] ['security for Costs' 'cross Claim' 'corporate Impecuniosity' 'stay of 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

Civil Proceeding Concerning a Notice of Motion for Security for Costs on a Cross Claim / Judgment on Notice of Motion for Security for Costs on the Cross Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Impact Edge Pty Ltd should be ordered to provide security for costs in respect of its cross-claim against AON Services Aust Ltd.' "Whether Impact Edge Pty Ltd's impecuniosity, alleged delay by AON Services Aust Ltd, potential stultification of the cross-claim, and the merits of the cross-claim warranted refusing security."]

Ratio Decidendi

Impact Edge Pty Ltd admitted impecuniosity through its solicitor and director, and the court was satisfied it could not meet an adverse costs order on the cross-claim. The evidence did not establish sufficient prejudice from delay, the notice to produce issue was not substantial, and the material from Impact did not persuade the court that security should be refused. Given the disparity between AON's claim and Impact's much larger cross-claim, and Impact's admitted inability to meet costs if unsuccessful, security for costs was ordered.

Court Disposition

AON Services Aust Ltd's motion for security for costs was granted; proceedings on the cross-claim were stayed until security was provided or the parties agreed otherwise; costs were reserved.

Orders

  • ['Impact Edge Pty Ltd, as cross claimant, is to provide security for costs to the satisfaction of the Registrar in the sum of $60,000.' 'Proceedings in the cross-claim are stayed until the security order is satisfied or until the parties agree otherwise.' 'The issue of costs is reserved.']