Salfinger v Napiat Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 247

Salfinger v Napiat Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 247

Security for costs should be ordered because Mr Salfinger was bankrupt, had not provided a statement of affairs, was resident overseas, and there was a substantial risk he would not satisfy any costs order, while he had not shown that he could not provide security. A conservative estimate of the respondent's likely costs justified security of $25,000 rather than the amount of at least $40,000 sought.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal; Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs / Security for Respondent's Costs of Appeal Against Sequestration Order
Outcome
Application for security for costs granted.
Legal Topics
['security for Costs of Appeal' 'sequestration Order' 'appellant Resident Out of the Jurisdiction' 'statement of Affairs' 'costs of Appeal']
['practice and Procedure' 'bankruptcy'] ['security for Costs of Appeal' 'sequestration Order' 'appellant Resident Out of the Jurisdiction' 'statement of Affairs' 'costs of Appeal']

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; Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs / Security for Respondent's Costs of Appeal Against Sequestration Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the appellant should be ordered to provide security for the respondent's costs of the appeal." "Whether the appellant's bankruptcy, overseas residence, failure to provide a statement of affairs, and ability to provide security justified an order for security for costs." 'What amount of security for costs was appropriate.']

Ratio Decidendi

Security for costs should be ordered because Mr Salfinger was bankrupt, had not provided a statement of affairs, was resident overseas, and there was a substantial risk he would not satisfy any costs order, while he had not shown that he could not provide security. A conservative estimate of the respondent's likely costs justified security of $25,000 rather than the amount of at least $40,000 sought.

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs granted.

Orders

  • ["The appellant is to provide security in the amount of $25,000 for the respondent's costs of the appeal within 21 days of today, such security to be provided by way of payment into Court or by the provision of security in some other form acceptable to the Registrar." 'The respondent is granted liberty to apply on 7...