Lanton Productions Pty Ltd v Edward Rushton Pty Ltd & Ors [1996] FCA 842

Lanton Productions Pty Ltd v Edward Rushton Pty Ltd & Ors [1996] FCA 842

The fifth respondent's application for further security for costs is dismissed as there is no relevant change in circumstances sufficient to justify revisiting the previous order, and Lanton retains a real and substantive interest in the proceedings. The application is found to be wholly unreasonable, justifying indemnity costs orders.

Parties
Applicant: Lanton Productions Pty Ltd; First Respondent: Edward Rushton Pty Ltd; Second Respondent: Electronic Learning Systems Pty Ltd; Third Respondent: Graeme Charles Pitts; Fourth Respondent: Moorgate Finance Pty Ltd; Fifth Respondent: Frank Edge; First Cross Claimant: Frank Edge; First Respondent to the Cross Claim: Moorgate Finance Pty Ltd; Second Cross Claimant: Edward Rushton Pty Ltd; First Respondent to the Second Cross Claim: Moorgate Finance Pty Ltd; Second Respondent to the Second Cross Claim: Frank Edge; Third Cross Claimant: Edward Rushton Pty Ltd; First Respondent to the Third Cross Claim: Electronic Learning Systems International Pty Ltd; Second Respondent to the Third Cross Claim: Graeme Charles Pitts; Fourth Cross Claimant: Electronic Learning Systems International Pty Ltd; First Respondent to the Fourth Cross Claim: Edward Rushton Pty Ltd; Fifth Cross Claimant: Graeme Charles Pitts; First Respondent to the Fifth Cross Claim: Edward Rushton Pty Ltd; Sixth Cross Claimant: Electronic Learning Systems International Pty Ltd; First Respondent to the Sixth Cross Claim: Lanton Productions Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 September 1996
Procedural Posture
Motion (security for Costs) Within Civil Proceedings / Interlocutory (motion for Further Security for Costs)
Outcome
Fifth respondent's motion dismissed; indemnity costs awarded against fifth respondent.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Trade Practices Act 1974 (cth) S 52, Costs Orders
Civil Procedure Security for Costs Trade Practices Act 1974 (cth) S 52 Costs Orders

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lanton Productions Pty Ltd

Applicant

Edward Rushton Pty Ltd

First Respondent

Electronic Learning Systems Pty Ltd

Second Respondent

Graeme Charles Pitts

Third Respondent

Moorgate Finance Pty Ltd

Fourth Respondent

Frank Edge

Fifth Respondent

Frank Edge

First Cross Claimant

Moorgate Finance Pty Ltd

First Respondent to the Cross Claim

Edward Rushton Pty Ltd

Second Cross Claimant

Moorgate Finance Pty Ltd

First Respondent to the Second Cross Claim

Frank Edge

Second Respondent to the Second Cross Claim

Edward Rushton Pty Ltd

Third Cross Claimant

Electronic Learning Systems International Pty Ltd

First Respondent to the Third Cross Claim

Graeme Charles Pitts

Second Respondent to the Third Cross Claim

Electronic Learning Systems International Pty Ltd

Fourth Cross Claimant

Edward Rushton Pty Ltd

First Respondent to the Fourth Cross Claim

Graeme Charles Pitts

Fifth Cross Claimant

Edward Rushton Pty Ltd

First Respondent to the Fifth Cross Claim

Electronic Learning Systems International Pty Ltd

Sixth Cross Claimant

Lanton Productions Pty Ltd

First Respondent to the Sixth Cross Claim

Procedural Posture

Motion (security for Costs) Within Civil Proceedings / Interlocutory (motion for Further Security for Costs)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether further security for costs should be ordered against the applicant for the fifth respondent's costs
  2. 2 Whether the application for additional security is an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether costs should be ordered on an indemnity basis

Ratio Decidendi

The fifth respondent's application for further security for costs is dismissed as there is no relevant change in circumstances sufficient to justify revisiting the previous order, and Lanton retains a real and substantive interest in the proceedings. The application is found to be wholly unreasonable, justifying indemnity costs orders.

Court Disposition

Fifth respondent's motion dismissed; indemnity costs awarded against fifth respondent.

Orders

  • The fifth respondent's motion is dismissed.
  • The fifth respondent pay AGC's costs of and incidental to the security application to be taxed on an indemnity basis and grants AGC leave to tax its costs forthwith.