Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v PRK Corporation Limited (No 2) [2008] FCA 523

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v PRK Corporation Limited (No 2) [2008] FCA 523

Although Mr Corrigan succeeded in relation to defects in the paragraphs pleading accessorial liability against him, he had adopted broader strike out submissions made by other respondents. Because he was not wholly successful on his motion and aligned himself with those broader submissions, his costs, like those of the other parties, should be costs in the cause.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Trade Practices Act Proceeding / Costs Determination Following Respondents' Motions to Strike Out the Whole or Part of the Amended Statement of Claim
Outcome
Costs of the respondents' motions, including the tenth respondent's motion, ordered to be costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
['strike Out Application' 'costs in the Cause' 'accessorial Liability' 'pleading Material Facts' 'section 45(2) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (cth)']
['competition and Consumer Law' 'civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['strike Out Application' 'costs in the Cause' 'accessorial Liability' 'pleading Material Facts' 'section 45(2) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (cth)']

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

Trade Practices Act Proceeding / Costs Determination Following Respondents' Motions to Strike Out the Whole or Part of the Amended Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the tenth respondent should receive a different costs order from the costs-in-the-cause order proposed for the respondents' strike out motions." "Whether the tenth respondent's success on defects in the pleading of accessorial liability justified an order that costs follow the event despite his adoption of broader strike out submissions."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although Mr Corrigan succeeded in relation to defects in the paragraphs pleading accessorial liability against him, he had adopted broader strike out submissions made by other respondents. Because he was not wholly successful on his motion and aligned himself with those broader submissions, his costs, like those of the other parties, should be costs in the cause.

Court Disposition

Costs of the respondents' motions, including the tenth respondent's motion, ordered to be costs in the cause.

Orders

  • ["The costs incurred by the parties in relation to the respondents' motions, including the costs of the motion of the tenth respondent, be costs in the cause."]