Epiflor Epipanel Pty Ltd v Abel Lemon & Co Pty Ltd [1988] FCA 369

Epiflor Epipanel Pty Ltd v Abel Lemon & Co Pty Ltd [1988] FCA 369

There were no facts establishing that the respondent’s conduct, either before or during the litigation, was so improper as to deprive the respondent of its costs. Accordingly, the applicant is required to pay the respondent's costs despite sympathy for the applicant's position.

Parties
Applicant: Epiflor Epipanel Pty Ltd; Respondent: Abel Lemon & Co Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 July 1988
Procedural Posture
Costs Application Following Discontinuance/strike Out of Proceedings / Final Orders Following Discontinuance/strike Out; Determination of Costs
Outcome
Application for no order as to costs dismissed; costs awarded to respondent; order stayed for three months.
Legal Topics
Costs, Discontinuance, Strike Out

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Epiflor Epipanel Pty Ltd

Applicant

Abel Lemon & Co Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Costs Application Following Discontinuance/strike Out of Proceedings / Final Orders Following Discontinuance/strike Out; Determination of Costs

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should pay the respondent's costs following discontinuance/strike-out of application

Ratio Decidendi

There were no facts establishing that the respondent’s conduct, either before or during the litigation, was so improper as to deprive the respondent of its costs. Accordingly, the applicant is required to pay the respondent's costs despite sympathy for the applicant's position.

Court Disposition

Application for no order as to costs dismissed; costs awarded to respondent; order stayed for three months.

Orders

  • The applicant pay the respondent's costs.
  • The order for costs be stayed for three months.