Paul Baker as Plaintiff Representative of 165 Plaintiff Group Members v The Partnership of Anne Patricia Larter, Alan Jones, Miraleste Pty Ltd t/as USG Partner and Leigh Johnson t/as STC Sports Trading Club [2016] NSWSC 1194

Paul Baker as Plaintiff Representative of 165 Plaintiff Group Members v The Partnership of Anne Patricia Larter, Alan Jones, Miraleste Pty Ltd t/as USG Partner and Leigh Johnson t/as STC Sports Trading Club [2016] NSWSC 1194

Security for costs was refused because the available evidence showed a strong case against the Arabella Foster Parties and Mr Foster, the plaintiff was unlikely to be able to provide the large security sought and an inquiry of group members would be expensive and time consuming, and the evidence supporting the amounts of security sought was inadequate because it did not explain the proposed defences or reliably relate anticipated work and costs to those defences. Ms Johnson's motion was dismissed because it was not pressed. Costs followed the event.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 August 2016
Procedural Posture
Representative Proceedings; Notices of Motion for Security for Costs / Decision on the Fifth Defendant's, Arabella Foster Parties' and Twelfth Defendant's Notices of Motion
Outcome
The fifth defendant's notice of motion, the Arabella Foster Parties' notice of motion, and the twelfth defendant's notice of motion were dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['security for Costs' 'security for Costs in Representative Proceedings' 'notices to Group Members' 'costs Follow the Event' 'stifling Proceedings']
['practice and Procedure' 'costs' 'representative Proceedings' 'consumer Law'] ['security for Costs' 'security for Costs in Representative Proceedings' 'notices to Group Members' 'costs Follow the Event' 'stifling Proceedings']

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

Representative Proceedings; Notices of Motion for Security for Costs / Decision on the Fifth Defendant's, Arabella Foster Parties' and Twelfth Defendant's Notices of Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether security for costs should be ordered in favour of the sixth, seventh, eighth, tenth and eleventh defendants and the twelfth defendant in representative proceedings.' 'Whether notices should be served on group members under s 175(5) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) to determine their willingness and ability to contribute to security.' 'What costs orders should be made where the fifth defendant did not press her motion and the other moving defendants were unsuccessful.']

Ratio Decidendi

Security for costs was refused because the available evidence showed a strong case against the Arabella Foster Parties and Mr Foster, the plaintiff was unlikely to be able to provide the large security sought and an inquiry of group members would be expensive and time consuming, and the evidence supporting the amounts of security sought was inadequate because it did not explain the proposed defences or reliably relate anticipated work and costs to those defences. Ms Johnson's motion was dismissed because it was not pressed. Costs followed the event.

Court Disposition

The fifth defendant's notice of motion, the Arabella Foster Parties' notice of motion, and the twelfth defendant's notice of motion were dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ["The fifth defendant's notice of motion filed 8 July 2016 dismissed with costs." "The sixth, seventh, eighth, tenth and eleventh defendants' notice of motion filed 26 July 2016 dismissed with costs." "The twelfth defendant's notice of motion filed 21 July 2016 dismissed with costs."]