Deep Investments Pty Ltd v Casey (No 4) [2018] FCA 1123

Deep Investments Pty Ltd v Casey (No 4) [2018] FCA 1123

Despite the respondents' substantial success in striking out most of the statement of claim, each party is to bear their own costs of the interlocutory applications filed 2 March 2017 as the dominant and unsuccessful aspect related to summary dismissal claims. For the applications to set aside notices to produce, the respective respondents (first to third, fourth, and fifth to seventh) are to pay the applicant's costs, as those applications were successful. Indemnity costs and orders for immediate taxation are not justified as the conduct was not oppressive or unreasonable, and the significance of costs did not warrant exceptional orders.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory/costs Application / Post Interlocutory Judgment on Costs
Outcome
Each party to bear their own costs of the strike out/summary judgment applications; applicant awarded costs of successful notices to produce applications against the relevant respondents. No indemnity costs or forthwith taxation.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'strike Out Applications' 'summary Judgment' 'notices to Produce' 'legal Professional Privilege']
['practice and Procedure' 'commercial Law'] ['costs' 'strike Out Applications' 'summary Judgment' 'notices to Produce' 'legal Professional Privilege']

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

Interlocutory/costs Application / Post Interlocutory Judgment on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What is the appropriate costs order following the partial success of strike out/summary judgment applications and applications to set aside notices to produce?' 'Should any party be awarded indemnity costs or costs taxed forthwith?' 'Were the applications or conduct of any party unreasonable or oppressive justifying an exceptional costs order?']

Ratio Decidendi

Despite the respondents' substantial success in striking out most of the statement of claim, each party is to bear their own costs of the interlocutory applications filed 2 March 2017 as the dominant and unsuccessful aspect related to summary dismissal claims. For the applications to set aside notices to produce, the respective respondents (first to third, fourth, and fifth to seventh) are to pay the applicant's costs, as those applications were successful. Indemnity costs and orders for immediate taxation are not justified as the conduct was not oppressive or unreasonable, and the significance of costs did not warrant exceptional orders.

Court Disposition

Each party to bear their own costs of the strike out/summary judgment applications; applicant awarded costs of successful notices to produce applications against the relevant respondents. No indemnity costs or forthwith taxation.

Orders

  • ['Each party bear its own costs of the interlocutory applications filed 2 March 2017.' "The first to third respondents pay the applicant's costs of the application filed 26 April 2017 to set aside a notice to produce issued by them to the applicant." "The fourth respondent pay the applicant's costs of the...