Arc Energy Limited, In the matter of Arc Energy Limited [No 2] [2008] FCA 1412

Arc Energy Limited, In the matter of Arc Energy Limited [No 2] [2008] FCA 1412

Although it was appropriate for the Intervener to draw the Court's attention to its litigation against the Plaintiff, its application for adjournment and related orders was made for an ulterior purpose—not as an objector in the interest of shareholders or proper conduct of the meeting. This constituted exceptional circumstances warranting a costs order against the Intervener for that aspect of the application.

Parties
Plaintiff: Arc Energy Limited; Defendant: Buru Energy Ltd; Intervener: Oil Basins Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 September 2008
Procedural Posture
Corporations/scheme of Arrangement / Costs Application After Substantive Judgment
Outcome
Intervener ordered to pay plaintiff's costs associated with the application for adjournment. Otherwise, no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Costs, Interveners, Schemes of Arrangement, Adjournments
Corporations Law Civil Procedure Costs Interveners Schemes of Arrangement Adjournments

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Arc Energy Limited

Plaintiff

Buru Energy Ltd

Defendant

Oil Basins Limited

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Corporations/scheme of Arrangement / Costs Application After Substantive Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Intervener should pay the Plaintiff's costs associated with the application for adjournment and related orders;
  2. 2 Whether the Intervener was acting as an objector or for an ulterior purpose in seeking adjournment;
  3. 3 Discretionary considerations in awarding costs against an intervener.

Ratio Decidendi

Although it was appropriate for the Intervener to draw the Court's attention to its litigation against the Plaintiff, its application for adjournment and related orders was made for an ulterior purpose—not as an objector in the interest of shareholders or proper conduct of the meeting. This constituted exceptional circumstances warranting a costs order against the Intervener for that aspect of the application.

Court Disposition

Intervener ordered to pay plaintiff's costs associated with the application for adjournment. Otherwise, no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The Intervener pay the costs of the plaintiff associated with the application by the Intervener for orders under paragraph 5 of its interlocutory process dated 7 August 2008.
  • Otherwise there be no order as to costs.