Cart Provider Pty Ltd v Park - [2017] QSC 27

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Cart Provider Pty Ltd & Ors v Park & Ors [2017] QSC 27

PARTIES:

CART PROVIDER PTY LTD
ABN 13 119 455 837
(first applicant)
CHINA FIRST PTY LTD
ABN 69 135 588 411
(second applicant)
WARATAH COAL PTY LTD
ABN 94 114 165 669
(third applicant)
CLIVE FREDERICK PALMER
(fourth applicant)
QNI RESOURCES PTY LTD
ABN 14 054 117 921
(fifth applicant)
QNI METALS PTY LTD
ABN 56 066 656 175

(sixth applicant)

v

JOHN PARK
(first respondent)
STEFAN DOPKING
(second respondent)
KELLY-ANNE TRENFIELD
(third respondent)
QUENTIN OLDE
(fourth respondent)
QUEENSLAND NICKEL PTY LTD (IN LIQUIDATION)
ABN 85 009 842 068

(fifth respondent)

FILE NO/S:

SC No 6150 of 2016

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Application

DELIVERED ON:

8 March 2017

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

On the papers.

JUDGE:

Bond J

ORDER:

The order of the Court is that the first to sixth applicants jointly and severally must pay the costs of Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) of the proceeding (including of its application to be removed as a party) and of its appearance on 22 February 2017, on the standard basis.

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – COSTS – GENERAL MATTERS – where Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) was removed from the proceeding pursuant to r 69(1)(a) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) – where the applicants consented to the Court ordering that they pay the costs of Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) – whether the costs order should be made against the applicants jointly, or jointly and severally

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 69(1)(a)

Perigo v Workers Compensation Nominal Insurer and Anor (No 3) [2013] NSWSC 6, cited

Thiess Watkins White Construction (in liq) v Witan Nominees (1985) Pty Ltd [1992] 2 Qd R 452, cited

COUNSEL:

K Byrne for the applicants

T P Sullivan QC for the former fifth respondent

SOLICITORS:

Alexander Law for the applicants
King & Wood Mallesons for the former fifth respondent

At a hearing on 8 February 2017 Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) (“the fifth respondent”) was removed as the fifth respondent to this proceeding pursuant to rule 69(1)(a) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld). The order was formalised in my order dated 13 February 2017.
I directed the parties to exchange brief written submissions on the question of the costs order which should be made, so that I could determine that issue on the papers.
I received submissions from the fifth respondent and brief oral submissions from Senior Counsel on its behalf at a hearing on 22 February 2017 which was principally directed to other matters.
The fifth respondent had submitted that the first to sixth applicants jointly and severally should pay the costs of the fifth respondent of and incidental to the application for removal which had been filed 6 February 2017, including the appearances on 8 and 22 February 2017. The principal argument was that the proceeding was…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Cart Provider Pty Ltd v Park

Details

AGLC: Cart Provider Pty Ltd v Park [2017] QSC 27
Case: [2017] QSC 27
Decision Date: 8 March 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Cart Provider Pty Ltd and others (the "applicants") brought a proceeding against Park. Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) was also a party to the proceeding. Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) applied to be removed as a party under rule 69(1)(a) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld). The applicants consented to the Court ordering that they pay the costs of Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liquidation). The applicants and Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) submitted differing views on the form of the costs order. The applicants submitted that the order should be made jointly against them. Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) submitted that the order should be made jointly and severally against them. The Court considered the submissions and examined the relevant provisions of the rules. The Court found that the costs order should be made jointly and severally against the applicants.

The Court noted that the relevant rules allowed for a costs order to be made against a party to the proceeding. The Court also noted that the relevant rules allowed for a costs order to be made jointly and severally against multiple parties. The Court found that the circumstances of the case warranted a costs order against the applicants. The Court also found that the costs order should be made jointly and severally against the applicants, as this would ensure that Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) could recover the full amount of its costs from the applicants. The Court noted that the applicants had consented to the Court ordering that they pay the costs of Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liquidation), and that this consent did not limit the form of the costs order. The Court also noted that the costs order would not have any significant impact on the applicants, as they had already consented to pay the costs of Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liquidation). The Court therefore made the order that the applicants jointly and severally must pay the costs of Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) of the proceeding (including of its application to be removed as a party) and of its appearance on 22 February 2017, on the standard basis.

Orders

Orders of the court

The order of the Court is that the first to sixth applicants jointly and severally must pay the costs of Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) of the proceeding (including of its application to be removed as a party) and of its appearance on 22 February 2017, on the standard basis.

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.

CITATION:	Cart Provider Pty Ltd & Ors v Park & Ors [2017] QSC 27
PARTIES:	CART PROVIDER PTY LTD ABN 13 119 455 837 (first applicant) CHINA FIRST PTY LTD ABN 69 135 588 411 (second applicant) WARATAH COAL PTY LTD ABN 94 114 165 669 (third applicant) CLIVE FREDERICK PALMER (fourth applicant) QNI RESOURCES PTY LTD ABN 14 054 117 921 (fifth applicant) QNI METALS PTY LTD ABN 56 066 656 175 (sixth applicant) v JOHN PARK (first respondent) STEFAN DOPKING (second respondent) KELLY-ANNE TRENFIELD (third respondent) QUENTIN OLDE (fourth respondent) QUEENSLAND NICKEL PTY LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) ABN 85 009 842 068 (fifth respondent)
FILE NO/S:	SC No 6150 of 2016
DIVISION:	Trial Division
PROCEEDING:	Application
DELIVERED ON:	8 March 2017
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	On the papers.
JUDGE:	Bond J
ORDER:	The order of the Court is that the first to sixth applicants jointly and severally must pay the costs of Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) of the proceeding (including of its application to be removed as a party) and of its appearance on 22 February 2017, on the standard basis.
CATCHWORDS:	PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – COSTS – GENERAL MATTERS – where Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) was removed from the proceeding pursuant to r 69(1)(a) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) – where the applicants consented to the Court ordering that they pay the costs of Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) – whether the costs order should be made against the applicants jointly, or jointly and severally Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 69(1)(a) Perigo v Workers Compensation Nominal Insurer and Anor (No 3) [2013] NSWSC 6, cited Thiess Watkins White Construction (in liq) v Witan Nominees (1985) Pty Ltd [1992] 2 Qd R 452, cited
COUNSEL:	K Byrne for the applicants T P Sullivan QC for the former fifth respondent
SOLICITORS:	Alexander Law for the applicants King & Wood Mallesons for the former fifth respondent