Luo v Zhai (No 6) [2016] FCA 805

Luo v Zhai (No 6) [2016] FCA 805

The bankruptcy of Ms Zhai and the delivery of Jantom's bill of costs constitute a change in circumstances that renders it unjust to require the applicant (Mr Luo) to pay Jantom's costs. The interlocutory costs order should therefore be vacated and replaced with an order that each party pay its own costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Commercial Dispute / Application to Vary Costs Order After Interlocutory Orders and Appeal
Outcome
Costs order in favour of Jantom vacated; each party to pay its own costs in relation to applicant's case against second respondent.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'interlocutory Orders' 'variation of Costs' 'liquidation' 'bankruptcy']
['commercial Law' 'corporations Law'] ['costs' 'interlocutory Orders' 'variation of Costs' 'liquidation' 'bankruptcy']

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

Commercial Dispute / Application to Vary Costs Order After Interlocutory Orders and Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the interlocutory costs order against the second respondent (Jantom) should be varied due to changed circumstances' 'Whether a change in circumstances justifies setting aside a costs order after entry' 'Whether the bankruptcy of the first respondent and the delivery of a bill of costs by the second respondent constitute such change']

Ratio Decidendi

The bankruptcy of Ms Zhai and the delivery of Jantom's bill of costs constitute a change in circumstances that renders it unjust to require the applicant (Mr Luo) to pay Jantom's costs. The interlocutory costs order should therefore be vacated and replaced with an order that each party pay its own costs.

Court Disposition

Costs order in favour of Jantom vacated; each party to pay its own costs in relation to applicant's case against second respondent.

Orders

  • ['Order 3 made on 31 July 2015 be vacated.' "In lieu thereof, in relation to the applicant's case against the second respondent, each party pay its own costs."]