Australian Chinese Newspaper Pty Ltd v Chinese Press Pty Ltd (No 3) [2001] FCA 738

Australian Chinese Newspaper Pty Ltd v Chinese Press Pty Ltd (No 3) [2001] FCA 738

Because Mr Ma's affidavit was filed late and the respondent acted reasonably in pursuing its summary dismissal motion until it had sufficient time by mid April to reconsider after service of that affidavit, but because the motion had been dismissed and would have been dismissed on Mr Ma's affidavit alone, the appropriate order was that the respondent pay one half of the applicant's costs of the motion rather than all costs or reserved costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 June 2001
Procedural Posture
Costs Determination on Respondent's Motion for Summary Dismissal / After Dismissal of the Respondent's Motion for Summary Dismissal
Outcome
The respondent was ordered to pay one half of the applicant's costs of the respondent's motion for summary dismissal.
Legal Topics
['summary Dismissal' 'interlocutory Costs' 'costs Following the Event' 'reservation of Costs']
['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['summary Dismissal' 'interlocutory Costs' 'costs Following the Event' 'reservation of Costs']

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

Costs Determination on Respondent's Motion for Summary Dismissal / After Dismissal of the Respondent's Motion for Summary Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the respondent should pay the applicant's costs of the respondent's motion for summary dismissal." 'Whether costs of the motion should be reserved pending the final hearing and determination of the proceeding.' "Whether the lateness of Mr Ma's affidavit and the respondent's reasonable pursuit of the motion until mid April justified a reduced costs order."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because Mr Ma's affidavit was filed late and the respondent acted reasonably in pursuing its summary dismissal motion until it had sufficient time by mid April to reconsider after service of that affidavit, but because the motion had been dismissed and would have been dismissed on Mr Ma's affidavit alone, the appropriate order was that the respondent pay one half of the applicant's costs of the motion rather than all costs or reserved costs.

Court Disposition

The respondent was ordered to pay one half of the applicant's costs of the respondent's motion for summary dismissal.

Orders

  • ["The respondent pay one half of the applicant's costs of the respondent's motion for summary dismissal brought by notice of motion filed on 23 February 2001."]