Ghosh v Miller [2018] NSWCA 138

Ghosh v Miller [2018] NSWCA 138

The respondents did not establish special circumstances justifying an order for security for costs as required by UCPR r 51.50, particularly given the delay in seeking the order, the grant of leave to appeal indicating arguable grounds, and insufficient evidence that an order would stultify the appeal or that appellant's conduct regarding assets had been established in legal proceedings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Motion for Security for Costs After Leave to Appeal Granted
Outcome
Motion dismissed
Legal Topics
['security for Costs' 'bankruptcy' 'defamation' 'interlocutory Appeals' 'costs']
['civil Procedure'] ['security for Costs' 'bankruptcy' 'defamation' 'interlocutory Appeals' 'costs']

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 / Ruling on Interlocutory Motion for Security for Costs After Leave to Appeal Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether special circumstances are established to justify an order for security for costs against an appellant who is an undischarged bankrupt after leave to appeal has been granted.']

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents did not establish special circumstances justifying an order for security for costs as required by UCPR r 51.50, particularly given the delay in seeking the order, the grant of leave to appeal indicating arguable grounds, and insufficient evidence that an order would stultify the appeal or that appellant's conduct regarding assets had been established in legal proceedings.

Court Disposition

Motion dismissed

Orders

  • ["The Respondents' motion filed on 16 May 2018 is dismissed." "The Respondents pay the appellant's costs of the motion."]