Australian Equity Investors, An Arizona Limited Partnership v Colliers International (NSW) Pty Limited (No 5) [2011] FCA 1041

Australian Equity Investors, An Arizona Limited Partnership v Colliers International (NSW) Pty Limited (No 5) [2011] FCA 1041

Security for costs in the sum of $250,000 was appropriate because the applicants were not resident in Australia, had no Australian assets, were on notice of the possibility of a security for costs application, and the evidence did not establish that an order would stifle the litigation or that their impecuniosity was caused by the respondent’s conduct. Delay and prior conduct by the respondent did not disentitle them to relief.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
Application for security for costs granted.
Legal Topics
['security for Costs' 'impecuniosity' 'delay in Application' 'stifling of Litigation' 'costs – Past and Future' 'discretionary Factors']
['practice and Procedure'] ['security for Costs' 'impecuniosity' 'delay in Application' 'stifling of Litigation' 'costs – Past and Future' 'discretionary Factors']

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

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether security for costs should be ordered against applicants who are resident outside Australia and have no assets in jurisdiction' 'Whether delay in making application disentitles respondent to relief' 'Whether applicants’ impecuniosity resulted from respondent’s conduct' 'Whether an order for security would stifle the litigation' 'Whether security should be ordered for costs already incurred']

Ratio Decidendi

Security for costs in the sum of $250,000 was appropriate because the applicants were not resident in Australia, had no Australian assets, were on notice of the possibility of a security for costs application, and the evidence did not establish that an order would stifle the litigation or that their impecuniosity was caused by the respondent’s conduct. Delay and prior conduct by the respondent did not disentitle them to relief.

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs granted.

Orders

  • ['The Applicants provide security for costs to the Respondent in the sum of $250,000 within 28 days of this Order.' 'The costs of this motion be costs in the proceedings.']