Pegasus Gold Australia Pty Ltd v Bateman Project Engineering Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 377

Pegasus Gold Australia Pty Ltd v Bateman Project Engineering Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 377

Insufficient grounds were shown for ordering security for costs because the seventh cross-claim was essentially defensive and its issues would be traversed in the proceedings in any event, so it was unlikely to materially increase pre-trial or hearing costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 April 2001
Procedural Posture
Application for Security for Costs in Relation to the Seventh Cross Claim / Notice of Motion Dated 5 October 2000; Reasons for Judgment on the Application
Outcome
Application for security for costs refused; PGA ordered to pay BKK's costs of the application.
Legal Topics
['security for Costs' 'cross Claim' 'defensive Cross Claim' 'contribution and Equitable Contribution' 'contributory Negligence' 'mitigation of Loss']
['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['security for Costs' 'cross Claim' 'defensive Cross Claim' 'contribution and Equitable Contribution' 'contributory Negligence' 'mitigation of Loss']

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

Application for Security for Costs in Relation to the Seventh Cross Claim / Notice of Motion Dated 5 October 2000; Reasons for Judgment on the Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether BKK should be ordered to provide security for costs in relation to the seventh cross-claim against PGA.' 'Whether the seventh cross-claim was essentially defensive in nature and would add materially to the costs of the proceedings.']

Ratio Decidendi

Insufficient grounds were shown for ordering security for costs because the seventh cross-claim was essentially defensive and its issues would be traversed in the proceedings in any event, so it was unlikely to materially increase pre-trial or hearing costs.

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs refused; PGA ordered to pay BKK's costs of the application.

Orders

  • ['I decline to make the order sought in paragraph one of the Notice of Motion dated 5 October 2000.' "I order PGA to pay BKK's costs of the application for security for costs."]