Clapham v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2012] FCA 1452

Clapham v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2012] FCA 1452

It is not in the interests of justice to make an order for security for costs where such an order would terminate the appeal without determination of its merits, particularly in the context of an appeal against a sequestration order changing the legal status of appellants.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 December 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
Application for security for costs dismissed
Legal Topics
['security for Costs' 'sequestration Order' 'appellate Procedure']
['practice and Procedure' 'bankruptcy'] ['security for Costs' 'sequestration Order' 'appellate Procedure']

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

Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether security for costs should be ordered in an appeal against sequestration orders making the appellants bankrupt' 'Whether an order for security would terminate the appeal without determination of its merits']

Ratio Decidendi

It is not in the interests of justice to make an order for security for costs where such an order would terminate the appeal without determination of its merits, particularly in the context of an appeal against a sequestration order changing the legal status of appellants.

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs dismissed

Orders

  • ['The interlocutory application filed 2 November 2012 is dismissed.' 'There be no order as to the costs of the interlocutory application.']