Charara v Integrex Pty Limited [2011] NSWCA 9

Charara v Integrex Pty Limited [2011] NSWCA 9

The original judge properly exercised her discretion in ordering a modest amount for security after considering the applicant's circumstances, the short and minor nature of the matter, the applicant's impecuniosity, and other relevant factors; the discretion was not confined to abuse of process and was exercised in the interests of justice, so the security order should stand. However, the costs order should be set aside and replaced with each party bearing its own costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Motion for Review / Court of Appeal Review of Interlocutory Decision Regarding Security for Costs
Outcome
Motion for review dismissed save as to costs; security for costs order to stand; costs orders varied.
Legal Topics
['security for Costs' 'leave to Appeal' 'inherent Jurisdiction' 'costs on Leave Application']
['practice and Procedure'] ['security for Costs' 'leave to Appeal' 'inherent Jurisdiction' 'costs on Leave Application']

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

Motion for Review / Court of Appeal Review of Interlocutory Decision Regarding Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the discretion to order security for costs on a leave application was correctly exercised' 'Whether the costs order made with the security for costs order was appropriate']

Ratio Decidendi

The original judge properly exercised her discretion in ordering a modest amount for security after considering the applicant's circumstances, the short and minor nature of the matter, the applicant's impecuniosity, and other relevant factors; the discretion was not confined to abuse of process and was exercised in the interests of justice, so the security order should stand. However, the costs order should be set aside and replaced with each party bearing its own costs.

Court Disposition

Motion for review dismissed save as to costs; security for costs order to stand; costs orders varied.

Orders

  • ["Her Honour's order as to security for costs should stand." "The stay order should operate for 14 days from today's date." 'The previous costs order is set aside and replaced with an order that each party pay its own costs of the application for security for costs.' 'The present motion for review is dismissed.'...