Eltran Pty Ltd v Westpac Banking Corporation

In the Federal Court of Australia, the case of Eltran Pty Ltd and others v Westpac Banking Corporation and others involved a dispute over costs. The applicants, consisting of various companies and an individual, sought an interlocutory injunction against Westpac and two other respondents. The primary focus of the dispute was the allocation of costs associated with the notice of motion.

The legal issues before the court revolved around the appropriate allocation of costs in relation to the notice of motion. Mr Byrne, counsel for Westpac, argued that his clients should bear all the costs. Conversely, Mr Dutney, representing the applicants, contended that Westpac should cover the costs of the first paragraph of the notice of motion, while the applicants should bear the costs of the second and third paragraphs.

Justice Pincus deliberated on the matter and concluded that Westpac should be awarded three-quarters of the total costs related to the notice of motion. The judge noted that while the applicants' case seemed stronger in relation to the second paragraph, the overall costs should not be discriminated against by paragraph. This decision aimed to avoid complexities in settling and resolving the costs through a registrar. Pincus J ordered that Westpac’s costs be taxed and paid to the extent of 75% by the applicants.