Vasram v AMP Life Limited [2001] FCA 602

Vasram v AMP Life Limited [2001] FCA 602

The respondent succeeded on the questions tried, and thus the applicant is to pay the respondent's costs of the hearing. The respondent was only partially successful on its notice of motion and is awarded 75 per cent of those costs.

Parties
Applicant: Chiman Lal Vasram; Respondent: AMP Life Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 May 2001
Procedural Posture
Representative Proceeding (class Action) / Post Interlocutory, Costs Orders Following Determination of Common Issues
Outcome
orders as to costs; cessation of representative proceedings
Legal Topics
Representative Proceedings, Costs, Common Issues, Federal Court Practice
Civil Procedure Representative Proceedings Costs Common Issues Federal Court Practice

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 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chiman Lal Vasram

Applicant

AMP Life Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Representative Proceeding (class Action) / Post Interlocutory, Costs Orders Following Determination of Common Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proceedings should continue as representative proceedings under Part IVA of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976
  2. 2 Whether the express terms of the policies created a right to deal with an agent of choice or for reinstatement of lapsed policies
  3. 3 Appropriate orders as to costs

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent succeeded on the questions tried, and thus the applicant is to pay the respondent's costs of the hearing. The respondent was only partially successful on its notice of motion and is awarded 75 per cent of those costs.

Court Disposition

orders as to costs; cessation of representative proceedings

Orders

  • The applicant pay the respondent's costs in relation to the hearing on 11 December 2000.
  • The applicant pay 75 per cent of the respondent's costs of the notice of motion filed on 4 October 2000.