BL & GY International Co Ltd v Hypec Electronics Pty Limited & Ors [2002] NSWSC 575

BL & GY International Co Ltd v Hypec Electronics Pty Limited & Ors [2002] NSWSC 575

Because the evidence and issues on Hypec's failed cross-claim were essentially co-extensive with the principal claim and the cross-claim was defensive, Colin Mead was entitled to the costs of the entire proceedings. Indemnity costs were justified because BL & GY's claim was based on false documentation and false,...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 June 2002
Procedural Posture
Costs Determination in Supreme Court Proceedings / Post Judgment Determination of Reserved Costs After Dismissal of the Plaintiff's Claim and Dismissal of the First Defendant's Cross Claim
Outcome
BL & GY International Co Limited and Grace Yang were ordered to pay Colin Mead's costs on an indemnity basis for himself and for his conduct of the proceedings in the name of Hypec Electronics Pty Limited in respect of the entire proceedings.
Legal Topics
['costs of Cross Claim' 'indemnity Costs' 'non Party Costs' 'abuse of Process' 'proceedings Commenced by Purported Authorised Director of Corporation' 'fabricated Evidence']
['costs' 'civil Procedure' 'corporations'] ['costs of Cross Claim' 'indemnity Costs' 'non Party Costs' 'abuse of Process' 'proceedings Commenced by Purported Authorised Director of Corporation' 'fabricated Evidence']

Source-derived case record

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

Costs Determination in Supreme Court Proceedings / Post Judgment Determination of Reserved Costs After Dismissal of the Plaintiff's Claim and Dismissal of the First Defendant's Cross Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Colin Mead should receive the costs of the entire proceedings notwithstanding Hypec's unsuccessful cross-claim." "Whether costs should be ordered on an indemnity basis because the plaintiff's case was based on false and fabricated evidence." "Whether Lucy Mead and/or Grace Yang should be ordered as non-parties to pay Colin Mead's costs under Pt 52A r 4 of the Supreme Court Rules." 'Whether the commencement and continuation of the proceedings constituted an abuse of the process of the Court.' 'Whether Grace Yang purported to commence the proceedings as an authorised director of BL & GY and should pay costs under Pt 52A r 4(5)(g).']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the evidence and issues on Hypec's failed cross-claim were essentially co-extensive with the principal claim and the cross-claim was defensive, Colin Mead was entitled to the costs of the entire proceedings. Indemnity costs were justified because BL & GY's claim was based on false documentation and false, collusive oral evidence. The evidence did not satisfy the heavy onus of proving that the dominant purpose of commencing the proceedings was to frustrate Family Court proceedings, so no costs order could be made against Lucy Mead or Grace Yang on the abuse of process ground. However Grace Yang had purported to commence the proceedings as an authorised director of BL & GY, gave...

Court Disposition

BL & GY International Co Limited and Grace Yang were ordered to pay Colin Mead's costs on an indemnity basis for himself and for his conduct of the proceedings in the name of Hypec Electronics Pty Limited in respect of the entire proceedings.

Orders

  • ['BL & GY and Grace Yang are to pay the costs of Colin Mead on an indemnity basis, being the costs incurred for himself and for his conduct of the proceedings in the name of Hypec Electronics Pty Limited in respect of the entire proceedings.' 'Those costs include the costs reserved on 9 December 1998 by G James J.'...