Hardingham v RP Data Pty Limited (Third Party Costs)

Hardingham v RP Data Pty Limited (Third Party Costs) involves an application for costs against a third party litigation funder, Court House Capital Pty Ltd, who funded the unsuccessful proceedings brought by Hardingham against RP Data Pty Limited. The dispute was heard by the Federal Court of Australia. The central issue was whether the court could make a costs order against a litigation funder who stood to receive financial benefit from the litigation, even if the applicant's claims were unsuccessful.

The court examined the relevant statutory and case law to determine if it had the authority to make a costs order against the funder. The court referenced the authority granted by section 43 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) and the principles established in previous cases. It concluded that the funder's potential financial gain from the litigation was sufficient to warrant a costs order against them, despite the unsuccessful outcome of the proceedings. The court found that the funder's involvement in the litigation justified the imposition of costs, aligning with the overarching objective of discouraging improper litigation conduct.

In its decision, the court ordered that Court House Capital Pty Ltd pay the respondent's costs on a party and party basis up to a specified date, and on an indemnity basis thereafter, as well as the costs of the respondent's interlocutory application. The court also mandated a lump sum payment of these costs and outlined procedures for determining the amount if the parties could not agree. The orders further required the respondent to file a Costs Summary and the funder to file a Costs Response, with a fallback mechanism for the Registrar to determine the lump sum if necessary. The court reserved the right for the parties to apply for further orders within a specified period.