Ganesh v Dobrowolski (No 2) [2021] FCA 1085

Ganesh v Dobrowolski (No 2) [2021] FCA 1085

Because the appeal had been dismissed, the respondents were the successful parties and none of the matters raised by Ms Ganesh provided a basis to depart from the usual order as to costs. The costs were therefore to be determined in accordance with Pt 40 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 and paid from Ms Ganesh's bankrupt estate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 September 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia in a Bankruptcy Matter / Costs Determination After Appeal Dismissed, Determined on the Papers
Outcome
The appellant was ordered to pay the first respondent's and second respondent's costs of and incidental to the appeal, with those costs to be paid from the bankrupt estate of Anandavalli Ganesh.
Legal Topics
['costs Following the Event' 'costs in Bankruptcy' 'federal Court Costs Rules' 'appeal Costs']
['practice and Procedure' 'bankruptcy' 'costs'] ['costs Following the Event' 'costs in Bankruptcy' 'federal Court Costs Rules' 'appeal 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

Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia in a Bankruptcy Matter / Costs Determination After Appeal Dismissed, Determined on the Papers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there was any basis to depart from the usual order that costs follow the event after the appeal was dismissed.' "Whether the respondents' costs should be determined under Part 40 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 and paid from the bankrupt estate of Anandavalli Ganesh."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because the appeal had been dismissed, the respondents were the successful parties and none of the matters raised by Ms Ganesh provided a basis to depart from the usual order as to costs. The costs were therefore to be determined in accordance with Pt 40 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 and paid from Ms Ganesh's bankrupt estate.

Court Disposition

The appellant was ordered to pay the first respondent's and second respondent's costs of and incidental to the appeal, with those costs to be paid from the bankrupt estate of Anandavalli Ganesh.

Orders

  • ["The appellant pay the first respondent's and the second respondent's costs of and incidental to the appeal, such costs to be determined in accordance with Part 40 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 and to be paid from the bankrupt estate of Anandavalli Ganesh."]