Green Line Investor Services Ltd v Cresvale Securities Ltd [1999] FCA 68

The appropriate order was that each party pay its and her own costs, given the early settlement, lack of hearing on the merits, and circumstances not justifying an award of costs to the applicant.

Parties: Applicant: Green Line Investor Services Limited; First Respondent: Cresvale Securities Limited; Second Respondent: Violeta Cavdarovska
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 27 January 1999
Procedural Posture: Application / Final Judgment on Costs Following Consent Orders
Outcome: Each party to pay its and her own costs.
Legal Topics: Costs, Settlement, Discretion of Court

Civil Procedure Costs Settlement Discretion of Court

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 2 Party arguments 2

Parties

Green Line Investor Services Limited

Applicant

Cresvale Securities Limited

First Respondent

Violeta Cavdarovska

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application / Final Judgment on Costs Following Consent Orders

Legal Issues

1 Appropriate order for costs after settlement by consent without admission

Ratio Decidendi

The appropriate order was that each party pay its and her own costs, given the early settlement, lack of hearing on the merits, and circumstances not justifying an award of costs to the applicant.

Court Disposition

Each party to pay its and her own costs.

Orders

By consent without admission, orders set out in paragraphs 7, 8, 9 and 11 made.