Epikk International Pty Ltd v Australian Football League [2000] FCA 43

Epikk International Pty Ltd v Australian Football League [2000] FCA 43

Nothing in the material filed in support contradicts or warrants variation of the previous order; Epikk has not shown its impecuniosity is attributable to respondents' conduct; in default of compliance with the security for costs order within 30 days, the proceedings are to be struck out.

Parties
Applicant: Epikk International Pty Ltd; First Respondent: Australian Football League; Second Respondent: Wilson Djuke Holdings Pty Ltd; Third Respondent: Brian Wilson; Fourth Respondent: The Commercial Network Pty Ltd; Fifth Respondent: Barry Besanko
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 February 2000
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside/variation of Order for Security for Costs / Interlocutory
Outcome
In default of compliance with the order for security for costs within 30 days, the proceedings are struck out. Costs of the motion dated 9 November 1999 are costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Corporate Insolvency, Variation or Discharge of Orders, Trade Practices Liability, Application to Strike Out Proceedings
Civil Procedure Security for Costs Corporate Insolvency Variation or Discharge of Orders Trade Practices Liability Application to Strike Out Proceedings

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 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Epikk International Pty Ltd

Applicant

Australian Football League

First Respondent

Wilson Djuke Holdings Pty Ltd

Second Respondent

Brian Wilson

Third Respondent

The Commercial Network Pty Ltd

Fourth Respondent

Barry Besanko

Fifth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside/variation of Order for Security for Costs / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether order for security for costs should be set aside or varied in light of applicant's impecuniosity
  2. 2 Whether applicant's impecuniosity is attributable to respondents' conduct
  3. 3 Whether proceedings should be struck out for non-compliance with order for security for costs

Ratio Decidendi

Nothing in the material filed in support contradicts or warrants variation of the previous order; Epikk has not shown its impecuniosity is attributable to respondents' conduct; in default of compliance with the security for costs order within 30 days, the proceedings are to be struck out.

Court Disposition

In default of compliance with the order for security for costs within 30 days, the proceedings are struck out. Costs of the motion dated 9 November 1999 are costs in the cause.

Orders

  • In default of compliance within 30 days of this day with the order of 15 September 1995 requiring provision by the applicant of security for costs, the proceedings be struck out.
  • The costs of the parties represented on the motion on notice dated 9 November 1999 be costs in the cause.