Pan Pharmaceuticals Ltd - Selim v McGrath - Costs [2004] NSWSC 129

Pan Pharmaceuticals Ltd - Selim v McGrath - Costs [2004] NSWSC 129

A costs order in favour of a non-party against a party will only be made in exceptional circumstances where there exists a justifiable expectation of compensation arising from compelled participation or extraordinary involvement in proceedings. Here, neither Faulding nor the Guild as non-parties had such circumstances justifying a general order for costs against the plaintiff, but the Guild was entitled to recover reasonable legal costs of complying with a subpoena initiated by the plaintiff.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Corporations Proceedings (applications for Costs) / Post Judgment (costs Determination)
Outcome
Applications for general costs orders by non-parties refused, except for order in favour of Guild for subpoena compliance costs.
Legal Topics
['costs Orders' 'non Party Costs' 'subpoena Compliance' 'discretionary Jurisdiction']
['corporations Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['costs Orders' 'non Party Costs' 'subpoena Compliance' 'discretionary Jurisdiction']

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

Corporations Proceedings (applications for Costs) / Post Judgment (costs Determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the court has jurisdiction to award costs against a party in favour of a non-party granted leave to be heard under Supreme Court (Corporations) Rules 1999, r.2.13; and if so, in what circumstances such an order should be made' 'Whether the court should award costs to non-parties who attended without leave' 'Entitlement of a person subpoenaed to recover legal costs of compliance from the issuing party']

Ratio Decidendi

A costs order in favour of a non-party against a party will only be made in exceptional circumstances where there exists a justifiable expectation of compensation arising from compelled participation or extraordinary involvement in proceedings. Here, neither Faulding nor the Guild as non-parties had such circumstances justifying a general order for costs against the plaintiff, but the Guild was entitled to recover reasonable legal costs of complying with a subpoena initiated by the plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Applications for general costs orders by non-parties refused, except for order in favour of Guild for subpoena compliance costs.

Orders

  • ['Order that the plaintiff pay the costs of the Pharmacy Guild of Australia of obtaining legal advice (including any opinion of counsel) concerning compliance with the subpoena (originally styled notice to produce) dated 26 September 2003 and served on it by the plaintiff and costs of and incidental to the...