Golden v Anderson (No 2)

In the matter of Golden versus Anderson, the plaintiff, a self-represented litigant, brought an action against the defendants. The dispute centred on whether the defendants should be granted gross sum costs orders in their favour. The case was heard in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. The defendants argued that the plaintiff's case was without merit, vexatious, and an abuse of the court process, and sought gross sum costs orders. The plaintiff opposed the application, arguing that the case was not vexatious and that the defendants had acted unreasonably in their conduct.

The court was required to determine whether gross sum costs orders should be made against the plaintiff. The court considered the principles of costs in party/party cases, the plaintiff's conduct, and the defendants' application. The court also considered the plaintiff's indication that he intended to commence further proceedings on the same or similar facts, and whether a restraining order against the plaintiff should be made.

The court found that the plaintiff's case was not vexatious, and that the defendants had acted unreasonably in their conduct. The court held that the plaintiff's conduct did not warrant the imposition of gross sum costs orders, but that a restraining order should be made to prevent the plaintiff from commencing further proceedings without first paying the costs of these proceedings. The court found that the plaintiff's conduct was not an abuse of the court process, but that the restraining order was necessary to protect the defendants from the plaintiff's continued litigation. The court made the restraining order and dismissed the defendants' application for gross sum costs orders.