In the matter of Legal Practice Management Group Pty Ltd, nSynergy Pty Ltd, nSynergy International Pty Ltd [2018] NSWSC 839

In the matter of Legal Practice Management Group Pty Ltd, nSynergy Pty Ltd, nSynergy International Pty Ltd [2018] NSWSC 839

The Applicants succeeded on the leave application and were entitled to a costs order following the event. Although the late offer of personal indemnities materially improved their position on an important issue, it did not significantly alter the overall scope of the application; the Respondent Companies continued to oppose leave on numerous grounds and likely would have done so even if the indemnities had been offered earlier. A 10% deduction reasonably reflected the costs referable to the late indemnity issue, while the Respondents' proposed orders and 50% discount were disproportionate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Bring Derivative Proceedings Under S 237 of the Corporations Act 2001 (cth) / Costs Determination Following Judgment Granting Leave to Continue Derivative Proceedings
Outcome
The Applicants obtained a costs order for 90% of their costs of the application, stayed until final determination of the substantive proceedings or further order.
Legal Topics
['statutory Derivative Proceedings' 'costs Discretion' 'costs Follow the Event' 'personal Indemnities' 'stay of Costs Order']
['corporations Law' 'civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['statutory Derivative Proceedings' 'costs Discretion' 'costs Follow the Event' 'personal Indemnities' 'stay of Costs Order']

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 Leave to Bring Derivative Proceedings Under S 237 of the Corporations Act 2001 (cth) / Costs Determination Following Judgment Granting Leave to Continue Derivative Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the successful Applicants should receive costs of the application for leave to bring derivative proceedings.' "Whether the Court should depart from the usual rule that costs follow the event because the Applicants offered personal indemnities for the Respondent Companies' costs at a late stage." 'Whether any costs order should be stayed until final determination of the substantive proceedings or further order.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Applicants succeeded on the leave application and were entitled to a costs order following the event. Although the late offer of personal indemnities materially improved their position on an important issue, it did not significantly alter the overall scope of the application; the Respondent Companies continued to oppose leave on numerous grounds and likely would have done so even if the indemnities had been offered earlier. A 10% deduction reasonably reflected the costs referable to the late indemnity issue, while the Respondents' proposed orders and 50% discount were disproportionate.

Court Disposition

The Applicants obtained a costs order for 90% of their costs of the application, stayed until final determination of the substantive proceedings or further order.

Orders

  • ['The Respondents pay 90% of the costs of Keith Redenbach and Campbell Ray on their application for leave to bring derivative proceedings, as agreed or as assessed, such order to be stayed until final determination of the substantive proceedings, or until further order.']