Carey v Freehills [2014] FCA 325

Carey v Freehills [2014] FCA 325

Given real doubts regarding appellants' capacity to satisfy an adverse costs order, an order for security for costs is appropriate; estimated quantum of $148,000 is fair and unlikely to stifle the appeal if financial capacity exists.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 April 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
Security for costs ordered
Legal Topics
['security for Costs' 'appeal' 'costs']
['civil Procedure'] ['security for Costs' 'appeal' '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 / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appellants should provide security for costs of the appeal' 'Whether the appellants have capacity to meet an adverse costs order']

Ratio Decidendi

Given real doubts regarding appellants' capacity to satisfy an adverse costs order, an order for security for costs is appropriate; estimated quantum of $148,000 is fair and unlikely to stifle the appeal if financial capacity exists.

Court Disposition

Security for costs ordered

Orders

  • ["Appellants to give security for respondent's costs in the sum of $148,000 in form acceptable to Registrar by or before 17 April 2014." 'Failing compliance, appeal is stayed subject to further order.' "Appellants to pay respondent's costs of the interlocutory application."]