Bowker & Anor v Software Engineers Australia (NSW) Pty Limited & Ors [2003] NSWIRComm 343

Bowker & Anor v Software Engineers Australia (NSW) Pty Limited & Ors [2003] NSWIRComm 343

Although the Court had reservations about the fourth and fifth respondents' conduct and the possible relationship between the adjournment and Federal Court proceedings, the adjournment was granted because justice required that the fourth and fifth respondents be heard to defend the applicants' claims, particularly given their joinder based on allegations concerning assets and an undertaking to the Court. The appropriate adjustment was to order the fourth and fifth respondents to pay the other parties' costs of the adjournment application and costs thrown away as a result of the adjournment.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 October 2003
Procedural Posture
Application Under S106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Interlocutory Judgment on an Adjournment Application by the Fourth and Fifth Respondents During the Resumed Hearing
Outcome
Adjournment application granted; fourth and fifth respondents ordered to pay the other parties' costs of the adjournment application and costs thrown away as agreed or assessed.
Legal Topics
['adjournment Application' 'costs Thrown Away' 'notice to Produce' 'joinder of Respondents' 'mareva Injunction Undertaking' 'federal Court Stay']
['industrial Relations' 'unfair Contracts' 'civil Procedure'] ['adjournment Application' 'costs Thrown Away' 'notice to Produce' 'joinder of Respondents' 'mareva Injunction Undertaking' 'federal Court Stay']

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

Application Under S106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Interlocutory Judgment on an Adjournment Application by the Fourth and Fifth Respondents During the Resumed Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the fourth and fifth respondents' adjournment application should be granted after their general manager failed to return to Australia for the resumed hearing." "Whether the fourth and fifth respondents should pay the other parties' costs of the adjournment application and costs thrown away." 'Whether respondents who were parties to Federal Court proceedings should be required to undertake not to press for lifting of the stay in those proceedings.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Court had reservations about the fourth and fifth respondents' conduct and the possible relationship between the adjournment and Federal Court proceedings, the adjournment was granted because justice required that the fourth and fifth respondents be heard to defend the applicants' claims, particularly given their joinder based on allegations concerning assets and an undertaking to the Court. The appropriate adjustment was to order the fourth and fifth respondents to pay the other parties' costs of the adjournment application and costs thrown away as a result of the adjournment.

Court Disposition

Adjournment application granted; fourth and fifth respondents ordered to pay the other parties' costs of the adjournment application and costs thrown away as agreed or assessed.

Orders

  • ["The fourth and fifth respondents are ordered to bear the other parties' costs of the hearing of the adjournment application, together with the costs thrown away as the result of the application being granted, as agreed, or assessed."]