Soumelides v Keglor Pty Limited [2002] FCA 39

Soumelides v Keglor Pty Limited [2002] FCA 39

Because the applicants filed and served evidentiary material late and in breach of directions, and the further affidavit by Elias Hawach introduced fresh matters immediately prior to trial, it was appropriate to vacate the trial dates and order the applicants to pay the costs of the respondents associated with that vacation and the motions regarding costs.

Parties
Applicant: George Soumelides; Applicant: Stravos Michaelides; Applicant: Loco Dog Pty Limited; First Respondent: Keglor Pty Limited; Second Respondent: Afrall Pty Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 December 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil / Costs Orders After Vacation of Trial Dates; Motions Determination
Outcome
Applicants to pay respondents' costs; all other motions refused.
Legal Topics
Costs, Vacation of Trial Dates, Directions Non Compliance
Civil Procedure Costs Vacation of Trial Dates Directions Non Compliance

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George Soumelides

Applicant

Stravos Michaelides

Applicant

Loco Dog Pty Limited

Applicant

Keglor Pty Limited

First Respondent

Afrall Pty Limited

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Costs Orders After Vacation of Trial Dates; Motions Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who should bear the costs occasioned by vacating trial dates due to late affidavit and evidentiary service by the applicants
  2. 2 Whether costs should be ordered on an indemnity basis
  3. 3 Whether costs should be taxed forthwith and paid immediately

Ratio Decidendi

Because the applicants filed and served evidentiary material late and in breach of directions, and the further affidavit by Elias Hawach introduced fresh matters immediately prior to trial, it was appropriate to vacate the trial dates and order the applicants to pay the costs of the respondents associated with that vacation and the motions regarding costs.

Court Disposition

Applicants to pay respondents' costs; all other motions refused.

Orders

  • The applicants pay the first and second respondents' costs of the hearing on 30 November 2001.
  • The applicants pay the first and second respondents' costs thrown away as a result of the order made on 30 November 2001 vacating the trial dates.