K & J Acquisitions Pty Ltd & Anor v Manauzzi & Anor [2009] NSWSC 279

The claim of the second plaintiff, Kevin Carter, is not hopeless and is brought as an alternative to the company's claim should the company fail, consistent with Lord Bingham's principles. The two plaintiffs' cases are substantially interlocked, and the existing security for costs provided by the company is adequate; further security is not warranted.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 17 April 2009
Procedural Posture: Civil / Interlocutory Application (amended Notice of Motion)
Outcome: Amended Notice of Motion dismissed; defendants to pay plaintiffs’ costs.
Legal Topics: ['summary Dismissal' 'security for Costs' 'shareholder Claims' 'reflective Loss' 'costs']

['civil Procedure'] ['summary Dismissal' 'security for Costs' 'shareholder Claims' 'reflective Loss' '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

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application (amended Notice of Motion)

Legal Issues

1 ["Whether the second plaintiff's claim should be struck out as offending the Prudential principle (reflective loss)" 'Whether additional security for costs should be ordered against the first plaintiff']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Amended Notice of Motion dismissed; defendants to pay plaintiffs’ costs.

Orders

['The Amended Notice of Motion of 4 March 2009 by the defendants is dismissed.' "The defendants should pay the plaintiffs' costs."]