FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| JAHAD v EQUITABLE FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS PTY LTD & ANOR | [2020] FCCA 2551 |
| Catchwords: CONSUMER LAW – Costs – Where first respondent intends to conduct business of raising funds in relation to a Shariah-compliant investments program – where first respondent accepts appointment by applicant as its Wakeel agent to invest its funds and to repay principle and profit in consideration for agency fee – where first respondent accepts investment by applicant – where investments are not fully repaid – where condition of first respondent’s investment license was that it would participate in dispute resolution scheme conducted by Credit and Investments Ombudsman – where Ombudsman makes determination that first respondent repay investment – where first respondent does not repay monies – where proceedings ensued – proceeding allocated to Consumer Protection List – where first respondent placed in administration – where second respondent overseas and does not provide instructions when matter listed for directions – costs ordered – where proceeding set down for hearing – jurisdiction put in issue – applicant discontinues proceeding – second respondent seeks costs on indemnity or party/party basis – applicable principles – discretionary considerations – relevance of conduct – orders made – Registrar directed to supply copy of reasons for judgment to Australian Securities & Investments commission. |
| Legislation: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 131A Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999 (Cth), ss 3, 21, 42, 43, 79 Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth), rr 13.01, 21.02 |
| Cases cited: Ahmed v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 1436 Alrjoob v Minister for Home Affairs[2018] FCA 1144 Covell Matthews & Partners v French Wools Ltd [1977] 1 WLR 876 Kaur v Minister For Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs (Costs), [2020] FCA 1247 MZZKH v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2013] FCCA 2287 Re Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs; Ex parte Lai Qin (1997) 186 CLR 622 |
| Applicant: | AMINA JAHAD |
| First Respondent: | EQUITABLE FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS PTY LTD "EFSOL" |
| Second Respondent: | USMAN SIDDIQUI |
| File Number: | MLG 2906 of 2019 |
| Judgment of: | Judge A Kelly |
| Hearing date: | 16 March 2020 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 24 March 2020 |
| Delivered at: | Melbourne |
| Delivered on: | 14 September 2020 |
REPRESENTATION
| Counsel for the Applicant: | Mr F.C. Brimfield |
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | Mykyta Lawyers |
| Counsel for the Respondents: | Ms M. Harris |
| Solicitors for the Respondents: | Cordoba Lawyers |
ORDERS
The application to set aside the order for costs made on 12 November 2019 against the second respondent, Usman Siddiqui, be dismissed.
The second respondent’s applications for the costs of this proceeding on an indemnity, alternatively a party/party, basis be dismissed.
Direct that the Registrar of the Court furnish a copy of these reasons for judgment to the Australian Securities & Investment Commission.
| FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE |
MLG 2906 of 2019
| AMINA JAHAD |
Applicant
And
| EQUITABLE FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS PTY LTD |
First Respondent
| USMAN SIDDIQUI |
Second Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
These reasons for judgment incorporate the reasons for judgment which are published this day in Abdi v Equitable Financial Solutions Pty Ltd & Anor [2020] FCCA 2521 (Abdi v Equitable Financial Solutions). For like reasons as are given in Abdi v Equitable Financial Solutions, I have determined that the second respondent’s application to set aside the Costs Order made in this proceeding and his application for the costs of the proceeding should be dismissed. For the reasons given in Abdi v Equitable Financial Solutions I have also determined that these reasons for judgment should be referred to the Australian Securities & Investment Commission.
I certify that the preceding one (1) paragraph is a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge A Kelly
Associate:
Date: 14 September 2020
- AGLC
- JAHAD v Equitable Financial Solutions Pty Ltd [2020] FCCA 2551
- Case
- [2020] FCCA 2551
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine whether to set aside a prior costs order made against the second respondent and whether to grant the second respondent's applications for costs on an indemnity or party/party basis. The court also considered the applicable principles for awarding costs, including discretionary considerations and the relevance of the parties' conduct.
Judge A Kelly dismissed the application to set aside the order for costs made against the second respondent on 12 November 2019. The court also dismissed the second respondent's applications for costs on an indemnity or party/party basis. The reasoning for these decisions is not detailed in the provided text, but the court directed that the Registrar furnish a copy of the reasons for judgment to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission.
Orders
Orders of the court
ORDERS
1. The application to set aside the order for costs made on 12 November 2019 against the second respondent, Usman Siddiqui, be dismissed.
2. The second respondent’s applications for the costs of this proceeding on an indemnity, alternatively a party/party, basis be dismissed.
3. Direct that the Registrar of the Court furnish a copy of these reasons for judgment to the Australian Securities & Investment Commission.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.