FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Berry v Innovia Security Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] FCA 1156
Citation: Berry v Innovia Security Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] FCA 1156 Parties: BENOY BERRY and GLOBAL SECURE CURRENCY LIMITED (COMPANY NUMBER 05127761) v INNOVIA SECURITY PTY LTD, FORMERLY KNOWN AS SECURENCY PTY LTD (ACN 072 353 452) File number(s): NSD 2597 of 2013 Judge(s): BUCHANAN J Date of judgment: 28 October 2015 Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – security for costs – limited security ordered based on personal undertakings – breach of undertakings – further security ordered Cases cited: Berry v Innovia Security Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 357 Date of hearing: 28 October 2015 Place: Sydney Division: GENERAL DIVISION Category: Catchwords Number of paragraphs: 22 Counsel for the Applicants: Dr C S Ward SC Solicitor for the Applicants: Marque Lawyers Counsel for the Respondent: Mr C Juebner Solicitor for the Respondent: K&L Gates
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION
NSD 2597 of 2013
BETWEEN: BENOY BERRY
First ApplicantGLOBAL SECURE CURRENCY LIMITED
(COMPANY NUMBER 05127761)
Second ApplicantAND: INNOVIA SECURITY PTY LTD, FORMERLY KNOWN AS SECURENCY PTY LTD (ACN 072 353 452)
Respondent
JUDGE:
BUCHANAN J
DATE OF ORDER:
28 OCTOBER 2015
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.In addition to the amount of $20,000 by way of security for costs, as ordered on 8 April 2014 and 29 April 2014, the applicants provide a further $120,000 as security for costs within 14 days, failing which the proceedings be stayed.
2.The amount of $120,000 to be provided by the applicants by way of further security for the respondent’s costs of the proceedings is to be paid into an interest bearing account of this Court in a form satisfactory to the Registrar and a copy of proof of payment is to be served on the solicitors for the respondent within 14 days thereafter.
3.In the event that further security is not provided on or before 30 November 2015, the proceedings stand dismissed.
4.The undertakings given by the first applicant on 28 April 2014 be discharged.
5.The applicants pay the respondent’s costs of the respondent’s interlocutory application filed on 13 October 2015.
6.The proceedings (if they remain on foot) be listed for further directions at 9.30 am on 4 December 2015.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION
NSD 2597 of 2013
BETWEEN: BENOY BERRY
First ApplicantGLOBAL SECURE CURRENCY LIMITED
(COMPANY NUMBER 05127761)
Second ApplicantAND: INNOVIA SECURITY PTY LTD, FORMERLY KNOWN AS SECURENCY PTY LTD (ACN 072 353 452)
Respondent
JUDGE:
BUCHANAN J
DATE:
28 OCTOBER 2015
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
These proceedings have been on foot since December 2013. They are moving very slowly.
On 8 April 2014, I ruled upon an application by the respondent that the applicants should provide security for costs before the matter proceeded any further (Berry…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Berry v Innovia Security Pty Ltd (No 2) and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2015] FCA 1156
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court examined the nature of the undertakings and the extent to which they had been breached. It was determined that the applicants had not complied with the terms of their personal undertakings, which had been given to secure the respondent's costs. As a result, the court considered it necessary to order further security to protect the respondent from potential financial loss. The court found that the additional amount of $120,000 was required to be provided by the applicants within 14 days, to be paid into an interest-bearing account of the court.
The court issued orders requiring the applicants to provide the additional security within a specified timeframe. Failure to do so would result in the proceedings being stayed and ultimately dismissed. The court also ordered that the existing undertakings be discharged and that the applicants pay the respondent's costs of the recent interlocutory application. The proceedings were to be listed for further directions to ensure compliance with the orders.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. In addition to the amount of $20,000 by way of security for costs, as ordered on 8 April 2014 and 29 April 2014, the applicants provide a further $120,000 as security for costs within 14 days, failing which the proceedings be stayed.
2. The amount of $120,000 to be provided by the applicants by way of further security for the respondent’s costs of the proceedings is to be paid into an interest bearing account of this Court in a form satisfactory to the Registrar and a copy of proof of payment is to be served on the solicitors for the respondent within 14 days thereafter.
3. In the event that further security is not provided on or before 30 November 2015, the proceedings stand dismissed.
4. The undertakings given by the first applicant on 28 April 2014 be discharged.
5. The applicants pay the respondent’s costs of the respondent’s interlocutory application filed on 13 October 2015.
6. The proceedings (if they remain on foot) be listed for further directions at 9.30 am on 4 December 2015.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.