Ezekiel-Hart v Reis [2024] FCA 1203

Ezekiel-Hart v Reis [2024] FCA 1203

This is an appropriate case for security for costs, as the application was made promptly, the appeal has low prospects of success, there is significant risk costs will not be recovered, there is no clear evidence the appellant cannot pay, and the factors do not weigh against a security order on the grounds advanced by the appellant.

Parties
Appellant: Emmanuel Tam Ezekiel-Hart; First Respondent: Robert Anthony Reis; Second Respondent: Council of the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
Security for costs application granted; stay and dismissal mechanisms ordered; costs of the interlocutory application to the respondents.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Stay Application, Prospects of Success on Appeal, Impecuniosity and Security for Costs, Dismissal for Failure to Provide Security
Practice and Procedure Bankruptcy Security for Costs Stay Application Prospects of Success on Appeal Impecuniosity and Security for Costs Dismissal for Failure to Provide Security

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Emmanuel Tam Ezekiel-Hart

Appellant

Robert Anthony Reis

First Respondent

Council of the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant should be ordered to provide security for costs in the appeal
  2. 2 Whether the appeal should be stayed or dismissed pending provision of security for costs
  3. 3 Whether the making of a security for costs order would stifle the appeal

Ratio Decidendi

This is an appropriate case for security for costs, as the application was made promptly, the appeal has low prospects of success, there is significant risk costs will not be recovered, there is no clear evidence the appellant cannot pay, and the factors do not weigh against a security order on the grounds advanced by the appellant.

Court Disposition

Security for costs application granted; stay and dismissal mechanisms ordered; costs of the interlocutory application to the respondents.

Orders

  • The appellant is to give security in the amount of $20,000.00 for the payment of costs that may be awarded against him.
  • The security is to be provided by the appellant paying $20,000.00 into Court by 4.30pm on Friday 15 November 2024.