Gangemi v Australian Securities and Investments Commission; Liedermoy v Australian Securities and Investments Commission

[2003] FCA 563

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Gangemi v Australian Securities & Investments Commission
And
Liedermoy v Australian Securities & Investments Commission
[2003] FCA 563

NINO GANGEMI v AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENTS COMMISSION
W289 OF 2002
JOHN OLIVER LIEDERMOY v AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENTS COMMISSION
W290 OF 2002

FRENCH J
28 MAY 2003
PERTH

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	W289 OF 2002

BETWEEN:	NINO GANGEMI APPLICANT
AND:	AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENTS COMMISSION RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	FRENCH J
DATE OF ORDER:	28 MAY 2003
WHERE MADE:	PERTH

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

There be no order as to the costs of the application.

Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	W290 OF 2002

BETWEEN:	JOHN OLIVER LIEDERMOY APPLICANT
AND:	AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENTS COMMISSION RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	FRENCH J
DATE OF ORDER:	20 MAY 2003
WHERE MADE:	PERTH

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

There be no order as to the costs of the application.

Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	W289 OF 2002

BETWEEN:	NINO GANGEMI APPLICANT
AND:	AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENTS COMMISSION RESPONDENT

W290 OF 2002

BETWEEN:                  JOHN OLIVER LIEDERMOY
   APPLICANT

AND:      AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENTS
   COMMISSION
   RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	FRENCH J
DATE:	28 MAY 2003
PLACE:	PERTH

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT ON ORDER AS TO COSTS

1. In delivering judgment in these matters I proposed to make no order as to costs on the basis that the applicants and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) had each been partially successful in the proceedings.  Counsel for ASIC however raised the possibility that a different order should be made in relation to the costs of the proceedings and I allowed seven days for submissions as to costs to be filed.

2. The solicitors for the applicants and Mr Benter for the Perth office of ASIC have now written to the Court indicating that they are agreed there should be no order as to the costs of the two applications.  I will order accordingly.

I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice French.

Associate:
Dated:            28 May 2003

Counsel for the Applicants:	Mr IA Morison
Solicitor for the Applicants:	O'Connor Partners
Counsel for the Respondent:	Mr AR Beech
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Australian Securities and Investments Commission
Date of Submissions as to  Costs:	26 May 2003
Date of Judgment:	28 May 2003