Valcorp Australia Pty Ltd v Angas Securities Limited (No 2) [2012] FCAFC 52

Valcorp Australia Pty Ltd v Angas Securities Limited (No 2) [2012] FCAFC 52

Although the appellant failed on the significant issue concerning loss of opportunity damages, it substantially succeeded by reducing the damages awarded against it by $562,927.51 and had to come to Court to obtain that result. The justice of the case was therefore reflected by ordering the respondents to pay 60% of the appellant's costs of the appeal, while also ordering the respondents to pay the appellant's costs of the cross-appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 April 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Costs and Final Orders After Appeal Allowed in Part
Outcome
Cross-appeal dismissed; final damages, refund, interest and costs orders made; respondents ordered to pay 60% of the appellant's costs of the appeal.
Legal Topics
['costs of Appeal' 'apportionment of Costs by Issue' 'cross Appeal Costs' 'damages Reduction']
['appellate Procedure' 'costs'] ['costs of Appeal' 'apportionment of Costs by Issue' 'cross Appeal Costs' 'damages Reduction']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Costs and Final Orders After Appeal Allowed in Part

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there should be no order as to the costs of the appeal where there were two major issues and each party succeeded on one issue.' "Whether the appellant's partial success in reducing the damages awarded against it justified an order that the respondents pay part of the appellant's costs of the appeal."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although the appellant failed on the significant issue concerning loss of opportunity damages, it substantially succeeded by reducing the damages awarded against it by $562,927.51 and had to come to Court to obtain that result. The justice of the case was therefore reflected by ordering the respondents to pay 60% of the appellant's costs of the appeal, while also ordering the respondents to pay the appellant's costs of the cross-appeal.

Court Disposition

Cross-appeal dismissed; final damages, refund, interest and costs orders made; respondents ordered to pay 60% of the appellant's costs of the appeal.

Orders

  • ['The cross-appeal is dismissed.' 'There be judgment for the first respondent against the appellant for damages in the sum of $649,198.06.' 'There be judgment for the second respondent against the appellant for damages in the sum of $305,673.54.' 'There be judgment for the third respondent against the appellant for...