In the matter of Moage Ltd (in liq) Moage Ltd (in liq) v Jagelman, Joseph Grant & Ors [1998] FCA 999

In the matter of Moage Ltd (in liq) Moage Ltd (in liq) v Jagelman, Joseph Grant & Ors [1998] FCA 999

Because the applicant conceded that security for costs was appropriate and did not rely on impecuniosity, difficulty in providing security, or litigation funding considerations to reduce the amount of security, the funding documents sought by the notices to produce could not assist the Court on the remaining issue of quantum. The fifth respondents' notice to produce was therefore irrelevant and oppressive, and the applicant was entitled to the substantive order sought; the same substantive order was made in relation to the first respondents' substantially similar notice.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 August 1998
Procedural Posture
Motion to Set Aside or Excuse Compliance With Notices to Produce Issued in Support of a Motion for Security for Costs in a Liquidation Proceeding / Interlocutory Motion at Directions Hearing
Outcome
Applicant's motion granted in substance; compliance with the fifth respondents' notice to produce was set aside or excused, the fifth respondents were ordered to pay the applicant's costs of that motion, and the same substantive order was made for the first respondents' substantially similar notice to produce with...
Legal Topics
['notice to Produce' 'security for Costs' 'company in Liquidation' 'costs of Interlocutory Motion' 'litigation Funding Documents']
['civil Procedure' 'corporations'] ['notice to Produce' 'security for Costs' 'company in Liquidation' 'costs of Interlocutory Motion' 'litigation Funding Documents']

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 to Set Aside or Excuse Compliance With Notices to Produce Issued in Support of a Motion for Security for Costs in a Liquidation Proceeding / Interlocutory Motion at Directions Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be excused from compliance with, or the Court should set aside, a notice to produce seeking litigation funding documents where the applicant conceded that security for costs was appropriate and only quantum remained in issue.' "Whether the notice to produce was irrelevant and oppressive in light of the applicant's concession and the matters not relied upon in fixing security." "What costs order should be made on the motion concerning the fifth respondents' notice to produce." "What order should be made in relation to the first respondents' substantially similar notice to produce."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because the applicant conceded that security for costs was appropriate and did not rely on impecuniosity, difficulty in providing security, or litigation funding considerations to reduce the amount of security, the funding documents sought by the notices to produce could not assist the Court on the remaining issue of quantum. The fifth respondents' notice to produce was therefore irrelevant and oppressive, and the applicant was entitled to the substantive order sought; the same substantive order was made in relation to the first respondents' substantially similar notice.

Court Disposition

Applicant's motion granted in substance; compliance with the fifth respondents' notice to produce was set aside or excused, the fifth respondents were ordered to pay the applicant's costs of that motion, and the same substantive order was made for the first respondents' substantially similar notice to produce with...

Orders

  • ["The order sought in the applicant's notice of motion concerning the fifth respondents' notice to produce is made." "The applicant's costs of the motion are to be paid by the fifth respondent." 'There is to be no taxation of those costs at this stage.' 'The first respondents are reserved liberty to apply on three...