Francovic, Boris v Fazzolare, John Domenic & Anor [1996] FCA 561

Francovic, Boris v Fazzolare, John Domenic & Anor [1996] FCA 561

Although there were serious deficiencies in the applicant's pleadings, successive amendments and lost time, the circumstances did not amount to a sufficiently special or unusual case to justify the exceptional order for indemnity costs. The appropriate order was that the applicant pay the respondents' costs of the strike out and discovery motions, including costs thrown away by the amendments, on a party and party basis.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 July 1996
Procedural Posture
Application for Costs in Federal Court Proceedings / Reasons for Judgment on the Respondents' Application for Indemnity Costs Following Motions to Strike Out the Further Amended Statement of Claim and for Discovery
Outcome
Respondents' application for indemnity costs refused; applicant ordered to pay respondents' relevant costs on a party and party basis.
Legal Topics
['indemnity Costs' 'party and Party Costs' 'pleadings' 'strike Out Motion' 'discovery' 'amendment of Pleadings']
['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['indemnity Costs' 'party and Party Costs' 'pleadings' 'strike Out Motion' 'discovery' 'amendment of Pleadings']

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

Application for Costs in Federal Court Proceedings / Reasons for Judgment on the Respondents' Application for Indemnity Costs Following Motions to Strike Out the Further Amended Statement of Claim and for Discovery

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant should pay the respondents' costs on an indemnity basis for the period from commencement of the proceedings until leave was granted to file a second further amended statement of claim." "Whether the defects in the applicant's pleadings and the abandoned claims justified departure from the usual party and party costs order." 'What costs order should be made for the motions to strike out the further amended statement of claim and for discovery.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although there were serious deficiencies in the applicant's pleadings, successive amendments and lost time, the circumstances did not amount to a sufficiently special or unusual case to justify the exceptional order for indemnity costs. The appropriate order was that the applicant pay the respondents' costs of the strike out and discovery motions, including costs thrown away by the amendments, on a party and party basis.

Court Disposition

Respondents' application for indemnity costs refused; applicant ordered to pay respondents' relevant costs on a party and party basis.

Orders

  • ["The applicant pay, on a party and party basis, the first and second respondents' costs of the motion to strike out the further amended statement of claim and of the motion for discovery, including all costs thrown away by reason of the successive amendments of the pleadings." 'Each party bear its own costs of the...