Tadros v J & R Investment Services Pty Ltd (No 2) [2008] FCA 832

Tadros v J & R Investment Services Pty Ltd (No 2) [2008] FCA 832

Although the respondents were themselves in default, the applicant’s proceedings obliged the respondents to respond, and an ordinary order for costs is justified, but there was no foundation for indemnity costs or for ordering the applicant’s solicitor to pay costs personally.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Application (originating and Amended Statements of Claim) / Costs Determination and Final Orders After Dismissal of Amended Statement of Claim
Outcome
Application dismissed; costs ordered against applicant on a party/party basis, excluding certain prior costs; claims for indemnity and solicitor's personal liability for costs refused.
Legal Topics
['striking Out Pleadings' 'costs Orders' 'indemnity Costs' 'personal Costs Orders Against Solicitors']
['practice and Procedure'] ['striking Out Pleadings' 'costs Orders' 'indemnity Costs' 'personal Costs Orders Against Solicitors']

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 (originating and Amended Statements of Claim) / Costs Determination and Final Orders After Dismissal of Amended Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether further costs should be ordered against the applicant' 'Whether costs should be ordered on an indemnity basis' 'Whether applicant’s solicitor should be personally liable for costs']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the respondents were themselves in default, the applicant’s proceedings obliged the respondents to respond, and an ordinary order for costs is justified, but there was no foundation for indemnity costs or for ordering the applicant’s solicitor to pay costs personally.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; costs ordered against applicant on a party/party basis, excluding certain prior costs; claims for indemnity and solicitor's personal liability for costs refused.

Orders

  • ['The application filed on 3 October 2006 is dismissed pursuant to s 31A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).' 'The applicant pay the costs of the first to fourth and sixth respondents (excluding costs in relation to a notice of motion to strike out filed by the first to fourth respondents on 24 August...