Atkinson v Killarney Properties Pty Ltd and Ors (No.2)

In *Atkinson v Killarney Properties Pty Ltd and Ors (No.2)*, heard in the Federal Court of Australia before Judge Antoni Lucev, the applicant, Mr. Atkinson, sought to vary and extend the time granted for filing costs submissions. This application arose in the context of earlier proceedings where Mr. Atkinson's general protections application had been dismissed, and various applications for an extension of time to file that application had also been dismissed. The court had previously made orders for submissions on costs.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether to grant an extension of time for Mr. Atkinson to file his costs submissions, notwithstanding the disparity in the time previously allocated to the parties for this purpose. The court was required to consider the relevant factors for granting an extension of time in such circumstances, particularly where the original timeframes had already expired.

Judge Lucev considered the principles governing extensions of time, noting that such applications are generally a matter of discretion. The court weighed the applicant's reasons for the delay against any prejudice to the respondents. In this instance, the court found that the applicant had not provided sufficient justification for the delay in filing his costs submissions, and that granting a further extension would unduly prejudice the respondents. Consequently, the court dismissed the application for an order varying and extending time.