Rogers v Asset Loan Co Pty Ltd (No 2) [2008] FCA 1333

Rogers v Asset Loan Co Pty Ltd (No 2) [2008] FCA 1333

While there was obstinate persistence in litigation by the applicant, as a litigant in person who pursued what she genuinely saw as a grievance, the ordinary rule as to the basis of taxation of costs should prevail. Indemnity costs were not warranted in this instance.

Parties
Applicant: Lynne Maree Rogers; First Respondent: Asset Loan Co Pty Ltd ACN 107 746 798; Second Respondent: Asset Loan Company Pty Ltd ACN 101 054 997; Third Respondent: Paul Alexander Sydney Hare; Fourth Respondent: Russell Frank Percival; Fifth Respondent: Judith Lorraine Hare as Trustee for The Hare Property Trust; Sixth Respondent: Riverstone Nominees Pty Ltd ACN 063 086 546 as Trustee for The Percival Family Trust No 2; Seventh Respondent: Sean Whittle
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 August 2008
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Post Dismissal, Costs Determination
Outcome
Application for indemnity costs dismissed; ordinary costs awarded to respondents
Legal Topics
Costs, Indemnity Costs, Litigant in Person, Discretion in Awarding Costs
Civil Procedure Costs Indemnity Costs Litigant in Person Discretion in Awarding Costs

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lynne Maree Rogers

Applicant

Asset Loan Co Pty Ltd ACN 107 746 798

First Respondent

Asset Loan Company Pty Ltd ACN 101 054 997

Second Respondent

Paul Alexander Sydney Hare

Third Respondent

Russell Frank Percival

Fourth Respondent

Judith Lorraine Hare as Trustee for The Hare Property Trust

Fifth Respondent

Riverstone Nominees Pty Ltd ACN 063 086 546 as Trustee for The Percival Family Trust No 2

Sixth Respondent

Sean Whittle

Seventh Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal / Post Dismissal, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should be awarded on an indemnity basis against the applicant, a litigant in person, following dismissal of an application for leave to appeal

Ratio Decidendi

While there was obstinate persistence in litigation by the applicant, as a litigant in person who pursued what she genuinely saw as a grievance, the ordinary rule as to the basis of taxation of costs should prevail. Indemnity costs were not warranted in this instance.

Court Disposition

Application for indemnity costs dismissed; ordinary costs awarded to respondents

Orders

  • The Applicant pay the Respondents' costs of and incidental to the application to be taxed.