Ryan, Grant v Great Lakes Council & Ors [1998] FCA 407

Ryan, Grant v Great Lakes Council & Ors [1998] FCA 407

Although the Court has the power to order security for costs, in representative proceedings under Part IVA, section 43(1A) operates as a substantial impediment to requiring group members to fund security. There is insufficient evidence about the willingness or means of group members to contribute. Ordering security would either stultify the proceedings or force individual actions, contrary to Part IVA's objectives. Therefore, the applications for security for costs are dismissed in the exercise of the Court's discretion.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 April 1998
Procedural Posture
Representative Proceeding (class Action) / Interlocutory Application: Security for Costs
Outcome
Applications for security for costs dismissed with costs to the applicants.
Legal Topics
['security for Costs' 'representative Proceedings' 'federal Court of Australia Act Part Iva' 'impecuniosity' 'class Action Procedure']
['civil Procedure'] ['security for Costs' 'representative Proceedings' 'federal Court of Australia Act Part Iva' 'impecuniosity' 'class Action Procedure']

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

Representative Proceeding (class Action) / Interlocutory Application: Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should order security for costs against impecunious applicants in representative proceedings under Part IVA of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Court has the power to order security for costs, in representative proceedings under Part IVA, section 43(1A) operates as a substantial impediment to requiring group members to fund security. There is insufficient evidence about the willingness or means of group members to contribute. Ordering security would either stultify the proceedings or force individual actions, contrary to Part IVA's objectives. Therefore, the applications for security for costs are dismissed in the exercise of the Court's discretion.

Court Disposition

Applications for security for costs dismissed with costs to the applicants.

Orders

  • ['The applications by Graham Barclay Oysters Pty Ltd and Graham Barclay Distributors Pty Ltd (re Grant Ryan proceedings) and by M W & E A Sciacca Pty Ltd and Tadeven Pty Ltd (re Kevin Gower proceedings) for provision of security for costs are dismissed.' 'The said respondents are to pay the applicants (Grant Ryan...