Apparel Group Pty Ltd v Bettina Liano Pty Ltd

In this case, the plaintiff, Apparel Group Pty Ltd, sought to enforce guarantees provided by Bettina Liano Pty Ltd, the first defendant, and Bettina Liano, the second defendant, in relation to debts owed by a company, Bettina Liano Pty Ltd. The plaintiff claimed that the second defendant, Bettina Liano, was personally liable under the guarantees. The defendants argued that the second defendant was not personally liable, and that if she were, the costs of the proceedings should be awarded on an indemnity basis. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The court had to determine whether the second defendant was personally liable under the guarantees and, if so, whether costs should be awarded on an indemnity basis. The court considered the language of the guarantee agreements, the nature of the guarantees, and the circumstances in which they were executed. The court also examined the relationship between the defendants and the guarantors, and the effect of the contractual indemnity provided by the first defendant to the second defendant.

The court found that the second defendant was personally liable under the guarantees. The court held that the language of the guarantee agreements was clear and unambiguous, and that the second defendant had expressly agreed to be personally liable. The court also held that the costs of the proceedings should be awarded on an indemnity basis, as the contractual indemnity provided by the first defendant to the second defendant did not extend to costs. The court found that the indemnity only covered the second defendant's liability under the guarantees, and did not cover the costs of the proceedings.

The court ordered that the second defendant was personally liable to the plaintiff under the guarantees, and that the costs of the proceedings be awarded on an indemnity basis. The court also ordered that the first defendant indemnify the second defendant for any liability under the guarantees. The court held that the first defendant's indemnity to the second defendant did not extend to costs, and that the second defendant was responsible for her own costs.