Termite Resources NL (in liq) v Meadows, in the matter of Termite Resources NL (in liq) (No 3) [2019] FCA 529

Termite Resources NL (in liq) v Meadows, in the matter of Termite Resources NL (in liq) (No 3) [2019] FCA 529

Although Termite was the successful party and obtained substantial judgment, it failed on its principal damages formulations and would have incurred lower preparation and trial costs had it confined its claim to the basis on which it succeeded. The quantum issues were partly severable, involved evidence and submissions not necessary to prove liability, and there was a stark disparity between the amounts claimed and the amount recovered. Those matters warranted depriving Termite of part of its costs, but the appropriate reduction was limited to 10%, so the defendants must pay 90% of Termite's costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Costs in Commercial and Corporations Proceeding / After Judgment for the Plaintiff and Further Submissions on Costs
Outcome
The plaintiff recovered 90% of its costs.
Legal Topics
['costs Discretion Under S 43 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (cth)' 'partial Success' "directors' and Officers' Duties" 'apportionment of Costs']
['corporations' 'costs'] ['costs Discretion Under S 43 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (cth)' 'partial Success' "directors' and Officers' Duties" 'apportionment of Costs']

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

Costs in Commercial and Corporations Proceeding / After Judgment for the Plaintiff and Further Submissions on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the defendants should pay all of Termite's costs or only a proportion because Termite failed to prove the particular damages claims it advanced." "Whether Termite's failure on quantum and causation issues warranted a departure from the ordinary rule that costs follow the event." "What percentage of Termite's costs should be recoverable."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although Termite was the successful party and obtained substantial judgment, it failed on its principal damages formulations and would have incurred lower preparation and trial costs had it confined its claim to the basis on which it succeeded. The quantum issues were partly severable, involved evidence and submissions not necessary to prove liability, and there was a stark disparity between the amounts claimed and the amount recovered. Those matters warranted depriving Termite of part of its costs, but the appropriate reduction was limited to 10%, so the defendants must pay 90% of Termite's costs.

Court Disposition

The plaintiff recovered 90% of its costs.

Orders

  • ["The Defendants are to pay 90% of Termite's costs of and incidental to the proceedings, including reserved costs, to be taxed in default of agreement."]