Black v Mills (No.5)

In *Black v Mills (No.5)*, the applicant, a petitioning creditor, sought an order for costs against the respondent following the dismissal of a creditors' petition. The petition had been dismissed due to the respondent establishing solvency and raising doubt regarding the balance of the asserted debt.

The central legal issue before Judge Driver was whether the petitioning creditor, despite being unsuccessful, should be awarded costs. This required the court to consider the conduct of the respondent in relation to the debt and the circumstances surrounding the dismissal of the petition.

Judge Driver determined that no order as to costs should be made. The court reasoned that while the petition was ultimately dismissed, the respondent's conduct had contributed to the situation. Specifically, the partial payment of the debt and the subsequent doubt cast upon the remaining balance, coupled with the establishment of solvency, meant that the respondent was not entirely free from blame in the proceedings. The court applied the general principle that costs follow the event but considered the specific circumstances and conduct of the parties in exercising its discretion.