Zoureff, Pearl v Apel, Isaac & Anor [1998] FCA 661

Zoureff, Pearl v Apel, Isaac & Anor [1998] FCA 661

There were no special or unusual features to justify departure from the usual rule as to costs except for the wasted hearing time caused by amendments to the Statement of Grounds; indemnity costs are awarded for the first day of hearing.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 June 1998
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Proceeding / Post Judgment (costs Order)
Outcome
Costs order against the Applicant
Legal Topics
['costs' 'deed of Arrangement' 'indemnity Costs' 'party and Party Costs']
['insolvency' 'bankruptcy'] ['costs' 'deed of Arrangement' 'indemnity Costs' 'party and Party 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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Proceeding / Post Judgment (costs Order)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the usual rule as to costs should apply' 'Whether indemnity costs are justified for part of the proceeding' 'Whether special or unusual features justify departure from the usual rule']

Ratio Decidendi

There were no special or unusual features to justify departure from the usual rule as to costs except for the wasted hearing time caused by amendments to the Statement of Grounds; indemnity costs are awarded for the first day of hearing.

Court Disposition

Costs order against the Applicant

Orders

  • ['The Applicant pay the costs of the Respondent of 13 October 1997 on an indemnity basis.' 'Otherwise the Applicant is to pay the costs of the Respondent on a party and party basis.']