Tonto Home Loans Australia Pty Ltd v Tavares; FirstMac Ltd v Di Benedetto; FirstMac Ltd v O'Donnell (No 2) [2012] NSWCA 129

ASIC's intervention was proper, efficient, and in the public interest. Despite adding some length to proceedings, it provided significant assistance and did not warrant an order for ASIC to pay the appellants' costs. Each party should bear its own costs regarding ASIC's intervention, and previous costs orders should be varied to reflect this.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 09 May 2012
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Applications to Vary Prior Orders in Court of Appeal
Outcome: Orders for costs varied to reflect that ASIC bears its own costs; appellants pay respondents' costs; applicants on the motion pay ASIC's costs.
Legal Topics: ['costs' 'intervener Costs' 'variation of Orders']

['civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'intervener Costs' 'variation of Orders']

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

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Applications to Vary Prior Orders in Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

1 ['Appropriate costs orders for intervenor ASIC' 'Variation of prior costs orders' "Responsibility for costs after ASIC's intervention"]

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Orders for costs varied to reflect that ASIC bears its own costs; appellants pay respondents' costs; applicants on the motion pay ASIC's costs.

Orders

["Set aside orders for costs made by the Supreme Court in favour of ASIC; plaintiff to pay first and second defendants'/first and second cross-claimants' costs." "Appellants to pay first and second respondents' costs of appeal." "Applicants on the motion to pay ASIC's costs of the motion." "Corrections to dates in...