Muldoon v Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2005] FCA 1469

Muldoon v Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2005] FCA 1469

Given that the applicants were successful on most substantive issues arising from the motion, and that the issue required determination due to the respondent's stance, the applicants should have their costs of the motion, but the circumstances do not warrant indemnity costs.

Parties
First Applicant: Ashley Muldoon; Second Applicant: Christopher Ong; Third Applicant: Peter Gallagher; Respondent: Australian Securities and Investments Commission
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 October 2005
Procedural Posture
Costs Application (notice of Motion) in Ongoing Proceedings / Post Interlocutory Motion; Ruling on Costs Only
Outcome
Respondent ordered to pay applicants' costs of the Notice of Motion; costs not awarded on an indemnity basis.
Legal Topics
Costs, Public Interest Immunity, Legal Professional Privilege
Civil Procedure Costs Public Interest Immunity Legal Professional Privilege

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ashley Muldoon

First Applicant

Christopher Ong

Second Applicant

Peter Gallagher

Third Applicant

Australian Securities and Investments Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Costs Application (notice of Motion) in Ongoing Proceedings / Post Interlocutory Motion; Ruling on Costs Only

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents should pay the applicants' costs of the Notice of Motion filed 10 October 2005
  2. 2 Whether costs should be awarded on an indemnity basis or otherwise

Ratio Decidendi

Given that the applicants were successful on most substantive issues arising from the motion, and that the issue required determination due to the respondent's stance, the applicants should have their costs of the motion, but the circumstances do not warrant indemnity costs.

Court Disposition

Respondent ordered to pay applicants' costs of the Notice of Motion; costs not awarded on an indemnity basis.

Orders

  • The Respondent pay the Applicants' costs of the Notice of Motion filed 10 October 2005.
  • Such costs shall be payable forthwith.