Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v Esanda Finance Corporation Ltd (ACN 004 346 043) [2004] FCA 685
The application to vary the earlier costs order was refused because the omission to make a costs order was not a clerical error, there was no clear entitlement, the issue had not been pressed at the time, intervening settlement had occurred taking such matters into account, and it would be inequitable to make such a variation now.
- Parties
- Applicant: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission; First Respondent: Esanda Finance Corporation Ltd (ACN 004 346 043)
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 28 May 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Application / Post Settlement Costs Application
- Outcome
- application refused
- Legal Topics
- Costs, Slip Rule, Amendment of Pleadings
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission
Applicant
Esanda Finance Corporation Ltd (ACN 004 346 043)
First Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application / Post Settlement Costs Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondent may seek an order for costs under the 'slip rule' after final orders and settlement when no application was made at the interlocutory hearing
Ratio Decidendi
The application to vary the earlier costs order was refused because the omission to make a costs order was not a clerical error, there was no clear entitlement, the issue had not been pressed at the time, intervening settlement had occurred taking such matters into account, and it would be inequitable to make such a variation now.
Court Disposition
application refused
Orders
- The first respondent's application to vary the orders made on 17 December 2002 be refused.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment