Hastings v Hastings [2009] NSWCA 294

Hastings v Hastings [2009] NSWCA 294

Registrar erred by not taking into account that ordering security for costs would stultify the bona fide and arguable appeal of the appellant; in the interests of justice, the Court declined to order security and set aside the Registrar's orders.

Parties
Appellant: Phillip Hastings; Respondent: John William Hastings
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 September 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Motion for Review of Registrar's Order on Security for Costs
Outcome
Registrar's security for costs order set aside; respondent's application dismissed; appellant's costs to be paid by respondent
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Appeal Procedure, Family Provision Act Applications
Civil Procedure Security for Costs Appeal Procedure Family Provision Act Applications

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Phillip Hastings

Appellant

John William Hastings

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Motion for Review of Registrar's Order on Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether orders for security for costs in appeals under the Family Provision Act should be made where the appellant's appeal would be stultified by such an order
  2. 2 Whether the Registrar erred in failing to consider that the appeal would be stultified if security for costs was ordered

Ratio Decidendi

Registrar erred by not taking into account that ordering security for costs would stultify the bona fide and arguable appeal of the appellant; in the interests of justice, the Court declined to order security and set aside the Registrar's orders.

Court Disposition

Registrar's security for costs order set aside; respondent's application dismissed; appellant's costs to be paid by respondent

Orders

  • Set aside the orders made by Registrar Schell on 22 June 2009.
  • Dismiss the respondent's application for security for costs.