Dimos, Leo (T/as Leo Dimos and Associates) v Dikeakos Nominees Pty Ltd (ACN 005 779 288)

[1996] FCA 1003

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )

)

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY       )    No. VG 3394 of 1995

)

GENERAL DIVISION                 )

BETWEEN:  LEO DIMOS trading as LEO DIMOS & ASSOCIATES

(Applicant)

AND:     DIKEAKOS NOMINEES PTY LTD (ACN 005 779 288)

(Respondent)

CORAM:    Ryan J

DATE:     31 October 1996

PLACE:    Melbourne

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

RYAN J:   I regard this motion as a regrettable illustration of misdirected energy and lack of meaningful communication between the solicitors for the parties.  It is not possible totally to absolve either solicitor from responsibility for the misconception which I consider permeated the volume of largely unnecessary correspondence which has been generated since the Full Court's order.  For the purpose of making absolutely clear which I consider was the undoubted intention and effect that the injunction was to cease to operate when the order of the Full Court was pronounced on 17 July 1996, I shall make a declaration to that effect.

Because of the matters to which I referred, subject to one aspect, I regard it as inappropriate to make any order as to
costs.  I should interpolate that, as indicated in the course of argument, I do not regard the costs of today's motion as flowing from the injunction so as to be recoverable pursuant to the applicant's undertaking as to damages.  The one matter which I regard as an exception to my original view that I should not make any order as to costs, is the fact that the applicant was, I consider, compelled by indications received from the solicitor for the respondent to attend in answer to the motion in order to ensure that no order as to costs was made against him.  I shall therefore order that the respondent pay the applicant's costs of this day, confined to counsel's fee on brief.  I fix those costs in the sum of $1,000.

I certify that this and the preceding one (1) page are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of his Honour Justice Ryan.

Associate:

Date:

Counsel for the applicant    :    Mr M. Dreyfus

Solicitors for the applicant :    Leo Dimos & Associates

Counsel for the respondent   :    Mr C.R. Northrop

Solicitors for the respondent     :    N.C. Gay & Co

Date of Hearing             :    31 October 1996

Date of Judgment            :    31 October 1996