Evans v Cleveland Investments Global Pty Ltd

In *Evans v Cleveland Investments Global Pty Ltd*, the appellant, Mr Evans, sought to appeal a decision of the primary court. The respondent, Cleveland Investments Global Pty Ltd, had previously obtained an order for security for costs against Mr Evans. The dispute before the Court of Appeal concerned whether Mr Evans had complied with the earlier order for security and, if not, what the consequences should be.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether to grant Mr Evans a further opportunity to provide the security for costs that had been ordered some five months earlier, or whether to dismiss his appeal as a consequence of his non-compliance. The court was required to consider the implications of the delay in providing security and the potential prejudice to the respondent.

Leeming JA noted that an order for security for costs had been made on 15 July 2013, requiring an unconditional bank guarantee of $15,000. As this security had not been provided, the court considered whether to extend the time for compliance. His Honour observed that the purpose of security for costs is to protect a respondent from incurring costs in defending an appeal that may be unrecoverable if the appeal is unsuccessful. Given the significant delay and the lack of any explanation for the non-compliance, the court determined that a further opportunity to provide security was not warranted.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal ordered that in the event the security in the amount of $15,000 was not provided by 4pm on Friday, 17 January 2014, the appeal would be dismissed with costs. Mr Evans was also ordered to pay the respondents' costs of the hearing on that day.