Dee-Tech Pty Limited v Neddam Holdings Pty Limited [2009] NSWSC 1095

Dee-Tech Pty Limited v Neddam Holdings Pty Limited [2009] NSWSC 1095

The renewed application for security for costs was refused because it was brought on the first day of trial without explanation for the defendant's delay, much of the supporting information had been available earlier, and the plaintiffs' pleading was largely defensive to the defendant's claims for forfeiture of a lease and retaking possession.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Application for Security for Costs / Renewed Application on the First Day of Trial
Outcome
Application refused.
Legal Topics
['security for Costs' 'delay in Bringing Application' 'plaintiff in Substance in Position of Defendant']

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

Application for Security for Costs / Renewed Application on the First Day of Trial

  1. 1 ['Whether security for costs should be ordered under the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, Pt 42 r 21 or the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 1335(1).' "Whether the defendant's unexplained delay in bringing the renewed application warranted refusal." 'Whether the plaintiffs were, in substance, largely defending claims by the defendant rather than acting as moving parties.']

Ratio Decidendi

The renewed application for security for costs was refused because it was brought on the first day of trial without explanation for the defendant's delay, much of the supporting information had been available earlier, and the plaintiffs' pleading was largely defensive to the defendant's claims for forfeiture of a lease and retaking possession.

Court Disposition

Application refused.

Orders

  • ['The application for security for costs is refused.']