PORTER v. GORDIAN RUNOFF LIMITED [2004] NSWCA 171

PORTER v. GORDIAN RUNOFF LIMITED [2004] NSWCA 171

It was not established that Hodgson JA had erred in ordering security for costs; appellant's impecuniosity, seriousness of findings, public interest, or merits did not amount to special circumstances outweighing the respondents' entitlement to protection; thus, the application to discharge the order for security for costs was refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 July 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application to Discharge Security for Costs Order in Court of Appeal
Outcome
Application to discharge order for security for costs refused; Notice of Motion dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['security for Costs' 'appeal Procedures' 'special Circumstances' 'public Interest' 'apprehended Bias']
['practice and Procedure' 'civil Procedure'] ['security for Costs' 'appeal Procedures' 'special Circumstances' 'public Interest' 'apprehended Bias']

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

Appeal / Application to Discharge Security for Costs Order in Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the order for security for costs made by Hodgson JA should be discharged' "Whether requiring security would stifle the appeal due to appellant's impecuniosity" "Proper application of 'special circumstances' under Pt.51 r.16 of the Supreme Court Rules 1970" 'Relevance of the merits, length, and public interest in the appeal for the exercise of discretion']

Ratio Decidendi

It was not established that Hodgson JA had erred in ordering security for costs; appellant's impecuniosity, seriousness of findings, public interest, or merits did not amount to special circumstances outweighing the respondents' entitlement to protection; thus, the application to discharge the order for security for costs was refused.

Court Disposition

Application to discharge order for security for costs refused; Notice of Motion dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ["Refuse to discharge Hodgson JA's order for security for costs: [2004] NSWCA 69" 'Notice of Motion dismissed with costs.']