Beattie & Sutherland v Osman (No. 5) [2009] NSWSC 923

Beattie & Sutherland v Osman (No. 5) [2009] NSWSC 923

The successful defendants were entitled to their costs of the proceedings except as to the costs of or incidental to their notice of motion dated 7 August 2009, as the general rule is that costs follow the event, and no sufficient basis had been shown to order otherwise. Allegations of delay or non-compliance with document production did not justify a different costs order, nor was it appropriate to determine the administrators' indemnity or make a declaration under s 447C without further argument and due process.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 August 2009
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Post Trial, Consequential Orders
Outcome
Plaintiffs to pay defendants' costs of the proceedings, except no order as to costs of or incidental to the notice of motion dated 7 August 2009. Application for declaration under s 447C stood over to a date to be fixed.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'statutory Administrators' 'indemnity' 'declarations']
['equity' 'corporations Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'statutory Administrators' 'indemnity' 'declarations']

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

Costs Application / Post Trial, Consequential Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What order should be made as to costs of the proceedings?' 'Should a declaration be made under s 447C of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) that the administrators were not validly appointed?']

Ratio Decidendi

The successful defendants were entitled to their costs of the proceedings except as to the costs of or incidental to their notice of motion dated 7 August 2009, as the general rule is that costs follow the event, and no sufficient basis had been shown to order otherwise. Allegations of delay or non-compliance with document production did not justify a different costs order, nor was it appropriate to determine the administrators' indemnity or make a declaration under s 447C without further argument and due process.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs to pay defendants' costs of the proceedings, except no order as to costs of or incidental to the notice of motion dated 7 August 2009. Application for declaration under s 447C stood over to a date to be fixed.

Orders

  • ["Order pursuant to s 98 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) that the plaintiffs pay the defendants' costs of the proceedings except that there be no order as to the costs of or incidental to the defendants' notice of motion dated 7 August 2009." 'The application for a declaration under s 447C of the Corporations...