Cosdean Investments Pty Ltd v Football Federation Australia Limited (No 5)
Case
•
[2007] FCA 1792
•23 November 2007
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Cosdean Investments Pty Ltd v Football Federation Australia Limited (No 5) [2007] FCA 1792
[2007] FCA 1792
23 November 2007
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Cosdean Investments Pty Ltd sought to set aside security for costs orders made against it and to extend the time to appeal against those orders. The security for costs orders required Cosdean to pay $40,000 to the first respondent and $25,000 to the second respondent, to secure the costs of the proceedings. Cosdean's application was based on a change in circumstances, namely that it had been unable to secure funding to pay for the costs and had sought financial assistance from Deumer Asia Ltd, the supplier of the FIFA endorsed key rings at the centre of the dispute. Deumer Asia had declined to assist Cosdean with its costs, stating that it would write off the debts owed by Cosdean if the proceedings were unsuccessful.
The court considered whether the change in circumstances was sufficient to warrant setting aside the security for costs orders. The court noted that Cosdean had not provided evidence of its financial position or the availability of funds to pay the security for costs. The court also considered whether Cosdean had a good prospect of success on the merits of its claim. The court noted that Cosdean's claim was based on the alleged wrongful conduct of the respondents, which had caused it significant loss and damage. However, the court found that Cosdean had not provided sufficient evidence to establish a good prospect of success.
The court refused Cosdean's application to set aside the security for costs orders and to extend the time to appeal against those orders. The court ordered that Cosdean pay the respondents' costs of and incidental to the application. The court also extended the time for Cosdean to pay the further sums for security for costs to 30 November 2007, and ordered that if such sums were not paid by that date, the proceedings be dismissed with costs.
The court considered whether the change in circumstances was sufficient to warrant setting aside the security for costs orders. The court noted that Cosdean had not provided evidence of its financial position or the availability of funds to pay the security for costs. The court also considered whether Cosdean had a good prospect of success on the merits of its claim. The court noted that Cosdean's claim was based on the alleged wrongful conduct of the respondents, which had caused it significant loss and damage. However, the court found that Cosdean had not provided sufficient evidence to establish a good prospect of success.
The court refused Cosdean's application to set aside the security for costs orders and to extend the time to appeal against those orders. The court ordered that Cosdean pay the respondents' costs of and incidental to the application. The court also extended the time for Cosdean to pay the further sums for security for costs to 30 November 2007, and ordered that if such sums were not paid by that date, the proceedings be dismissed with costs.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Litigation & Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Security for Costs
-
Costs
-
Contempt of Court
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Cosdean Investments Pty Ltd v Football Federation Australia Limited (No 5) [2007] FCA 1792
Most Recent Citation
Neptune Hospitality Pty Ltd v Ozmen Entertainment Pty Ltd (No 2) [2022] FCA 427
Cases Cited
10
Statutory Material Cited
0