CMA Corporation Limited v McSorley (No 2) [2012] FCA 732

CMA Corporation Limited v McSorley (No 2) [2012] FCA 732

A lump sum costs order is justified where the evidence supports the quantum and method, opposition is absent, and balancing both parties' interests warrants discounting and avoiding the expense of taxation, particularly considering financial hardship and pro bono representation.

Parties
First Plaintiff: CMA Corporation Limited; Second Plaintiff: CMA Recycling Pty Ltd; Defendant: Ian McSorley
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application for Lump Sum Costs / Post Judgment; Costs Order
Outcome
Costs awarded in a lump sum of $123,306.77 to the plaintiffs instead of any taxed costs.
Legal Topics
Costs, Lump Sum Costs, Federal Court Procedure
Civil Procedure Costs Lump Sum Costs Federal Court 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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CMA Corporation Limited

First Plaintiff

CMA Recycling Pty Ltd

Second Plaintiff

Ian McSorley

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application for Lump Sum Costs / Post Judgment; Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to award costs in a lump sum instead of taxed costs under Federal Court Rules 2011 r 40.02

Ratio Decidendi

A lump sum costs order is justified where the evidence supports the quantum and method, opposition is absent, and balancing both parties' interests warrants discounting and avoiding the expense of taxation, particularly considering financial hardship and pro bono representation.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded in a lump sum of $123,306.77 to the plaintiffs instead of any taxed costs.

Orders

  • The plaintiffs' costs be awarded in a lump sum of $123,306.77, instead of any taxed costs.