Hannaford v Commonwealth Bank of Australia

In *Hannaford v Commonwealth Bank of Australia*, the appellant sought to set aside a judgment and order of the court. The respondent, Commonwealth Bank of Australia, sought security for its costs of the appeal. The appeal concerned the appellant's alleged failure to comply with court directions, the weakness of the appeal grounds, and the appellant's impecuniosity and residence in the United States.

The central legal issues before the court were whether special circumstances existed to justify ordering security for costs, whether the appellant was ordinarily resident outside Australia, and the appropriate quantum of security to be ordered, given the appellant's challenge to the respondent's assessment of costs.

Gleeson JA considered the appellant's impecuniosity, limited attendance at the final hearing, failure to comply with court directions, and the weak nature of the appeal grounds. His Honour found that these factors, taken together, constituted special circumstances warranting an order for security for costs. The court determined that the appellant was ordinarily resident outside Australia and ordered that the appellant provide security for the respondent's costs of the appeal in the sum of $40,000. The appeal was stayed until this security was provided, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the motion.