Kanjian Holdings No 1 Pty Ltd v Kanjian; Kanjian v Kanjian (No 4)

The case of Kanjian Holdings No 1 Pty Ltd v Kanjian; Kanjian v Kanjian (No 4) involved two related parties engaged in a complex dispute across two separate proceedings. The litigation primarily revolved around claims of dishonesty, undue influence, duress, and fraud, which were ultimately abandoned and discontinued at a late stage by the plaintiff. The defendants experienced mixed success in these proceedings, leading to a dispute over the allocation of costs. The plaintiff sought to deprive the successful defendant of their costs, arguing that the litigation was invited and that indemnity costs were appropriate. The defendants contended that a global costs order would be more equitable.

The court was tasked with determining whether the defendants' litigation was indeed invited, thereby justifying a departure from the usual rule that costs follow the event. The court also had to consider whether the successful defendant should be deprived of their costs and if indemnity costs were warranted. Additionally, the court needed to decide if a global costs order, rather than separate orders for each proceeding, was appropriate given the circumstances.

In its decision, the court found that the defendants had not invited the litigation, as the claims were not baseless but rather had some foundation. However, the court did not deprive the successful defendant of their costs entirely. Instead, it considered the appropriateness of indemnity costs and ultimately decided against awarding them, finding that the claims were not frivolous or vexatious. The court also determined that a global costs order was appropriate, taking into account the interconnectedness of the two proceedings and the overall conduct of the parties.

The final orders reflected the court's reasoning, awarding costs to the successful defendant but subject to specific conditions that mitigated the financial burden on the plaintiff. The court's decision balanced the need to deter frivolous litigation with the principle that costs should generally follow the event, ensuring a fair outcome for both parties.