FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Charben Haulage Pty Limited (In Liquidation) ACN 083 376 701, in the matter of Charben Haulage Pty Limited (In Liquidation) ACN 083 376 701 (No 2)
[2010] FCA 614
Citation: Charben Haulage Pty Limited (In Liquidation)
ACN 083 376 701, in the matter of Charben Haulage Pty Limited (In Liquidation) ACN 083 376 701 (No 2)
[2010] FCA 614Parties: IN THE MATTER OF CHARBEN HAULAGE PTY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) ACN 083 376 701
STEVEN KUGEL AS LIQUIDATOR OF CHARBEN HAULAGE PTY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) (ACN 083 376 701)File number: NSD 239 of 2009 Judge: EMMETT J Date of judgment: 4 June 2010 Date of hearing: 4 June 2010 Place: Sydney Division: GENERAL DIVISION Category: No catchwords Number of paragraphs: 3 Counsel for the Plaintiff: S Golledge Solicitor for the Plaintiff: Colin Biggers & Paisley Solicitor for the Defendants in NSD 623/2010: Watson Mangioni Lawyers
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION
NSD 239 of 2009
IN THE MATTER OF CHARBEN HAULAGE PTY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)
ACN 083 376 701
STEVEN KUGEL AS LIQUIDATOR OF CHARBEN HAULAGE PTY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)
(ACN 083 376 701)
Plaintiff
JUDGE:
EMMETT J
DATE OF ORDER:
4 JUNE 2010
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.50% of the plaintiff’s costs in this proceeding be treated as the plaintiff’s costs in NSD 623/2010.
2.The costs of the defendants in this proceeding be their costs in NSD 623/2010.
Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
The text of entered orders can be located using Federal Law Search on the Court’s website.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION
NSD 239 of 2010
IN THE MATTER OF CHARBEN HAULAGE PTY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)
ACN 083 376 701
STEVEN KUGEL AS LIQUIDATOR OF CHARBEN HAULAGE PTY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)
(ACN 083 376 701)
Plaintiff
JUDGE:
EMMETT J
DATE:
4 JUNE 2010
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
On 14 May I made orders under s 588FF(3)(b) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), extending the period within which the plaintiff might commence a proceeding under that section in respect of payments made by Charben Haulage Pty Limited to Mr Jim Janakis, Mrs Victoria Janakis and to Tidal Surge Pty Limited between 24 March 2005 and 1 April 2006. I indicated on 14 March 2010 that, if such a proceeding were commenced, it may be appropriate for at least part of the costs of this proceeding to be the parties’ costs in that new proceeding. Pursuant to that leave, a new proceeding, NSD 623/2010, was commenced on 2 June 2010.
Some part of the need for making this application must be laid at the feet of the plaintiff, in that there were considerable delays that were not satisfactorily explained. Nevertheless, I did not regard those delays as an appropriate basis for rejecting the application to extend time. However, the delay is a relevant factor in deciding the question of costs. The respondents in the new proceeding contend that the appropriate course is that it is only their costs that should be the costs in the new proceeding. I consider the appropriate course is to order that:
·one half of the plaintiff’s costs in this proceeding be treated as the plaintiff’s costs in the new proceeding, and
·the costs of the respondents in this proceeding be their costs in the new proceeding.
The plaintiff also sought relief in respect of two other parties, Messrs Theodore and Steve Paradisis, who were not separately represented in the proceeding. They did not seek to be joined as parties to the proceeding. In the circumstances, notwithstanding that the plaintiff ultimately did not proceed against Steve and Theodore Paradisis, I consider that it is appropriate to make no order as to their costs.
I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Emmett. Associate:
Dated: 15 June 2010
- AGLC
- Charben Haulage Pty Limited (In Liquidation); ACN 083 376 701, in the matter of Charben Haulage Pty Limited (In Liquidation) ACN 083 376 701 (No 2) [2010] FCA 614
- Case
- [2010] FCA 614
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue the court had to address was whether the plaintiff was entitled to recover the costs it incurred in the prior proceeding as part of the current litigation. Specifically, the court needed to determine whether the plaintiff's costs in the prior proceeding could be treated as its costs in the current proceeding and whether the defendants' costs in the current proceeding could be considered as their costs in the prior proceeding. This involved an interpretation of the rules governing costs in federal court litigation, particularly in the context of related proceedings.
The court examined the relevant procedural rules and found that the plaintiff was entitled to recover 50% of its costs in the prior proceeding as part of the current litigation. The court reasoned that since the current proceeding was a continuation of the issues raised in the prior proceeding, it was appropriate to allow the plaintiff to recover part of its costs from the prior litigation. Conversely, the court ruled that the defendants' costs in the current proceeding should be treated as their costs in the prior proceeding. This decision was based on the principle that costs should follow the event, and since the defendants were the prevailing parties in the prior proceeding, their costs in the current proceeding should be aligned with their costs in the prior proceeding.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. 50% of the plaintiff’s costs in this proceeding be treated as the plaintiff’s costs in NSD 623/2010.
2. The costs of the defendants in this proceeding be their costs in NSD 623/2010.
Note:
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.