Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Cassimatis (No 7)

The decision in Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Cassimatis (No 7) deals with a dispute over costs incurred in the context of a statutory claim brought by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) against the Cassimatis. The nature of the dispute focuses on whether ASIC's conduct warrants a departure from the usual basis for assessing costs and whether the court should reopen previous costs orders in light of ASIC's amendment to its pleadings. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The central legal issues before the court involved whether ASIC's conduct warranted any departure from the usual basis for assessing costs, particularly in light of the amendment to ASIC’s pleadings to include a claim based on section 206E of the Corporations Act. The court also needed to determine whether the previous costs orders concerning the summary judgment application, leave to appeal, and the notice of appeal should be set aside or altered. The Cassimatises argued that they would not have brought the summary judgment application if ASIC had pleaded section 206E earlier, and thus sought a costs order that would compensate them for the costs incurred as a result of the amendments.

The court reasoned that there was no evidence that ASIC's conduct warranted a departure from the usual basis for assessing costs. The court found that ASIC’s conduct, particularly the amendment to include a claim based on section 206E, did not necessitate any special consideration in the assessment of costs. The court also concluded that reopening the previous costs orders was not appropriate, as there was no clear evidence of costs orders concerning the application for leave to appeal and the notice of appeal. Instead, the court decided that the costs incurred should be taxed in the usual manner after the determination of the matter, allowing for any set off concerning costs orders to be addressed at that time.

ORDERS:
1. The applicant pay the respondents’ costs of the applicant’s application for leave to amend filed on 27 May 2016 to be taxed if not agreed.
2. The applicant pay the respondents’ costs of amendment to their defence occasioned by the applicant’s amendment, to be taxed if not agreed.