Byrnes v Brisconnections Management Company Limited (No. 2) [2009] FCA 1432

Byrnes v Brisconnections Management Company Limited (No. 2) [2009] FCA 1432

Mr Byrnes' conduct was out of the ordinary and unreasonable: he had no basis for a claim based on the product disclosure statement, was not an appropriate class leader, commenced a hopeless proceeding, caused urgent preparation for interlocutory relief that was then abandoned, and put the Macquarie Companies to significant inconvenience and very substantial cost. Those matters justified indemnity costs. A lump sum order was also appropriate because further taxation costs should not be incurred, particularly given the inference that Mr Byrnes would probably be unable to meet a costs order of the amount foreshadowed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Application by the Second and Third Defendants for Indemnity Costs and Lump Sum Costs After the Proceeding Had Been Summarily Dismissed
Outcome
Application granted; Mr Byrnes was ordered to pay the Macquarie Companies' costs on an indemnity basis as a lump sum.
Legal Topics
['indemnity Costs' 'lump Sum Costs' 'strike Out' 'summary Dismissal' 'unreasonable Conduct in Litigation' 'class Action']
['costs' 'civil Procedure' 'corporations'] ['indemnity Costs' 'lump Sum Costs' 'strike Out' 'summary Dismissal' 'unreasonable Conduct in Litigation' 'class Action']

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 / Application by the Second and Third Defendants for Indemnity Costs and Lump Sum Costs After the Proceeding Had Been Summarily Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Mr Byrnes should be ordered to pay the costs of the Macquarie Companies on an indemnity basis.' 'Whether those costs should be calculated as a lump sum rather than taxed.']

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Byrnes' conduct was out of the ordinary and unreasonable: he had no basis for a claim based on the product disclosure statement, was not an appropriate class leader, commenced a hopeless proceeding, caused urgent preparation for interlocutory relief that was then abandoned, and put the Macquarie Companies to significant inconvenience and very substantial cost. Those matters justified indemnity costs. A lump sum order was also appropriate because further taxation costs should not be incurred, particularly given the inference that Mr Byrnes would probably be unable to meet a costs order of the amount foreshadowed.

Court Disposition

Application granted; Mr Byrnes was ordered to pay the Macquarie Companies' costs on an indemnity basis as a lump sum.

Orders

  • ['The applicant pay the costs of the second and third respondents in the sum of $185,000.']