In the matter of Shinetec (Australia) Pty Ltd [2021] NSWSC 1176

In the matter of Shinetec (Australia) Pty Ltd [2021] NSWSC 1176

No costs order, including no indemnity costs order, should be made because the proceedings were not determined on the merits, no party was successful, the question whether Shinetec reasonably needed to bring the application involved disputed facts that should not be resolved on the papers in a costs application, and both sides had arguably behaved unreasonably.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 September 2021
Procedural Posture
Application Under Ss 459 H or 459 J of the Corporations Act 2001 (cth) to Set Aside a Creditor's Statutory Demand, With Alternative Restraint Orders / Written Costs Submissions After the Proceedings Were Dismissed as Unnecessary
Outcome
No order as to costs made.
Legal Topics
["creditor's Statutory Demand" 'costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'no Determination on the Merits']
['corporations' 'civil Procedure'] ["creditor's Statutory Demand" 'costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'no Determination on the Merits']

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 Under Ss 459 H or 459 J of the Corporations Act 2001 (cth) to Set Aside a Creditor's Statutory Demand, With Alternative Restraint Orders / Written Costs Submissions After the Proceedings Were Dismissed as Unnecessary

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Shinetec should have an order for costs against RPL and TGPL after the proceedings were dismissed as unnecessary.' 'Whether any costs order should be made on an indemnity basis.' "Whether the leading of evidence of service of a creditor's statutory demand in the Federal Court Proceedings could reasonably have required a further application to set aside the Demand."]

Ratio Decidendi

No costs order, including no indemnity costs order, should be made because the proceedings were not determined on the merits, no party was successful, the question whether Shinetec reasonably needed to bring the application involved disputed facts that should not be resolved on the papers in a costs application, and both sides had arguably behaved unreasonably.

Court Disposition

No order as to costs made.

Orders

  • ['No order as to the costs of the proceedings.']