Bird v Ford [2013] NSWCA 323

Bird v Ford [2013] NSWCA 323

Applicant did not establish special circumstances justifying an order for security for costs; respondent is not impecunious and appeal is not shown to be hopeless, unreasonable, or groundless.

Parties
Appellant: Vrede Jane Bird; First Respondent: David Clifton Ford; Second Respondent: Gary Cedric Pritchard; John Stonham & Co Lawyers; Mullane & Lindsay Solicitors
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 September 2013
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Appeal – Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
Application for security for costs dismissed (except for para 1 of notice of motion). Costs order made in favour of respondent.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Costs of Appeal
Civil Procedure Security for Costs Costs of Appeal

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vrede Jane Bird

Appellant

David Clifton Ford

First Respondent

Gary Cedric Pritchard

Second Respondent

John Stonham & Co Lawyers

Mullane & Lindsay Solicitors

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Appeal – Application for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether special circumstances exist to justify an order for security for costs in an appeal

Ratio Decidendi

Applicant did not establish special circumstances justifying an order for security for costs; respondent is not impecunious and appeal is not shown to be hopeless, unreasonable, or groundless.

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs dismissed (except for para 1 of notice of motion). Costs order made in favour of respondent.

Orders

  • Dismiss the applicant's notice of motion filed on 16 August 2013 other than para 1 thereof.
  • Order that the applicant is to pay Ms Bird's costs of the notice of motion as and from 8 September 2013.