Tobacco Control Coalition Inc v Philip Morris (Australia) Ltd [2000] FCA 1004

Tobacco Control Coalition Inc v Philip Morris (Australia) Ltd [2000] FCA 1004

Leave to file an Amended Application was refused as the proposed description of group members failed to provide sufficient certainty for group membership, including impermissible reference to future persons, contrary to principles of representative proceedings. Security for costs was ordered due to TCCI's admitted impecuniosity, failure to disclose financial position of those 'standing behind' the litigation, structure immunising parties of substance from costs, and the lack of a strong prospect of success or satisfactory public interest claim in the litigation as presently framed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 July 2000
Procedural Posture
Representative Proceeding / Interlocutory Applications: Leave to Amend, Security for Costs
Outcome
Amended Application refused; Security for costs ordered.
Legal Topics
['representative Proceedings' 'security for Costs' 'impecunious Applicants' 'public Interest Litigation' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'unconscionable Conduct']
['practice and Procedure' 'trade Practices' 'consumer Protection'] ['representative Proceedings' 'security for Costs' 'impecunious Applicants' 'public Interest Litigation' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'unconscionable Conduct']

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

Representative Proceeding / Interlocutory Applications: Leave to Amend, Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to file an Amended Application in the proposed form' 'Whether the proposed description of group members is satisfactory for a representative proceeding' 'Whether security for costs should be ordered against an impecunious corporate applicant' 'Whether imposing security for costs would stifle a meritorious public interest claim' 'Appropriate quantum and terms for security for costs']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to file an Amended Application was refused as the proposed description of group members failed to provide sufficient certainty for group membership, including impermissible reference to future persons, contrary to principles of representative proceedings. Security for costs was ordered due to TCCI's admitted impecuniosity, failure to disclose financial position of those 'standing behind' the litigation, structure immunising parties of substance from costs, and the lack of a strong prospect of success or satisfactory public interest claim in the litigation as presently framed.

Court Disposition

Amended Application refused; Security for costs ordered.

Orders

  • ['The application for leave to file the Amended Application in the form annexed to the affidavit of Stephen John Moss dated 3 December 1999 is refused.' 'On or before 30 September 2000, the applicant provide security in the sum of $100,000 in respect of the costs of each of the three sets of respondents; security to...