Brecher v Barrack Investments Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 472

Brecher v Barrack Investments Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 472

Security for costs was refused because the respondents failed to establish, with credible evidence, any substantial incremental costs resulting only from the presence of the corporate applicant as a party. The overlap between the facts and issues in the claims of Dr Brecher and EBPL was significant, and the provision of an undertaking from Dr Brecher to meet any order for costs against EBPL further supported refusal of the application.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs / Decision on Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Interlocutory application for security for costs dismissed
Legal Topics
['security for Costs' 'trustees' 'joinder of Parties' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'unconscionable Conduct']
['practice and Procedure' 'corporations Law' 'commercial Law'] ['security for Costs' 'trustees' 'joinder of Parties' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'unconscionable Conduct']

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

Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs / Decision on Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether security for costs should be ordered against a corporate applicant where claims overlap with an individual applicant' 'Whether incremental costs have been established justifying the order for security' 'Relevance of an undertaking by an individual applicant to satisfy any costs ordered against the corporate applicant']

Ratio Decidendi

Security for costs was refused because the respondents failed to establish, with credible evidence, any substantial incremental costs resulting only from the presence of the corporate applicant as a party. The overlap between the facts and issues in the claims of Dr Brecher and EBPL was significant, and the provision of an undertaking from Dr Brecher to meet any order for costs against EBPL further supported refusal of the application.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory application for security for costs dismissed

Orders

  • ['The interlocutory application is dismissed.' 'The proceedings are listed for argument on costs (in the absence of agreement between the parties) and for a case management hearing at 9am on 13 April 2018.']