Bideena Pty Ltd v Growth Super Fund Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 1440

Bideena Pty Ltd v Growth Super Fund Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 1440

Although the security for costs applications were resolved by undertakings and not final determination, the provision of the undertakings achieved the defendants’ objective and could have resolved the matter earlier, justifying an order that Bideena pay the defendants’ costs of the applications for security for costs on the ordinary basis. This was not an appropriate case for indemnity costs or forthwith payment as no special or unusual feature warranted a departure from the usual basis.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Costs Application / Determination of Costs Following Resolution of Security for Costs Applications by Undertakings
Outcome
Costs awarded to defendants on the ordinary basis.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'security for Costs' 'corporate Trustees' 'undertakings in Lieu of Security']
['civil Procedure' 'corporate Law'] ['costs' 'security for Costs' 'corporate Trustees' 'undertakings in Lieu of Security']

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

Interlocutory Costs Application / Determination of Costs Following Resolution of Security for Costs Applications by Undertakings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether costs should be awarded to the defendants following resolution of security for costs applications by undertakings.' 'Whether the costs should be awarded on an indemnity basis or be payable forthwith.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the security for costs applications were resolved by undertakings and not final determination, the provision of the undertakings achieved the defendants’ objective and could have resolved the matter earlier, justifying an order that Bideena pay the defendants’ costs of the applications for security for costs on the ordinary basis. This was not an appropriate case for indemnity costs or forthwith payment as no special or unusual feature warranted a departure from the usual basis.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to defendants on the ordinary basis.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiff pay the first and fifth defendants' costs of their interlocutory application filed on 14 April 2016." "The plaintiff pay the second, third and fourth defendants' costs of their interlocutory application filed on 20 April 2016." "The plaintiff pay the sixth defendant's costs of its interlocutory...