Gurtler v Finance Now Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 631

Gurtler v Finance Now Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 631

There has been a material change in circumstances since the original security for costs orders due to the joinder of parties, increased scope and complexity, and extensive discovery; the amounts sought are justified and reasonable, and further security should be provided to respondents. Delay in application is not prejudicial given the circumstances.

Parties
First Applicant: Christopher Gurtler; Second Applicant: Loanpos Limited (In Liquidation) (ACN 091 687 615); First Respondent: Finance Now Pty Ltd (ACN 102 197 973); Second Respondent: Kosta Patsan; Third Respondent: Malcolm Bligh Turnbull
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 June 2009
Procedural Posture
Application for Variation of Security for Costs Order / Ruling on Motions
Outcome
Applications to vary security for costs orders granted: previous orders vacated and new security requirements imposed.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Variation of Order, Discovery, Joinder of Parties, Costs, Confidentiality
Practice and Procedure Corporations Security for Costs Variation of Order Discovery Joinder of Parties Costs Confidentiality

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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher Gurtler

First Applicant

Loanpos Limited (In Liquidation) (ACN 091 687 615)

Second Applicant

Finance Now Pty Ltd (ACN 102 197 973)

First Respondent

Kosta Patsan

Second Respondent

Malcolm Bligh Turnbull

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Variation of Security for Costs Order / Ruling on Motions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Should the security for costs orders be varied to increase the amount of security?
  2. 2 Has there been a material change of circumstances since the original orders?
  3. 3 Are the revised amounts sought by respondents reasonable?

Ratio Decidendi

There has been a material change in circumstances since the original security for costs orders due to the joinder of parties, increased scope and complexity, and extensive discovery; the amounts sought are justified and reasonable, and further security should be provided to respondents. Delay in application is not prejudicial given the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Applications to vary security for costs orders granted: previous orders vacated and new security requirements imposed.

Orders

  • Orders for security for costs in favour of 1st and 3rd respondents: applicants to provide $350,000 within 7 days and $200,000 within 7 days of listing for trial, via bank guarantee.
  • Orders for security for costs in favour of 2nd respondent: applicants to provide $100,000 within 7 days and $50,000 within 7 days of listing for trial, via bank guarantee.