Large v Djamirze

In this case, the plaintiffs, including a natural person and two corporations, sought damages against the defendant, alleging breaches of fiduciary duty, deceit, and conspiracy. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute centred on the defendant's application for the plaintiffs to provide security for costs, which the plaintiffs opposed. The plaintiffs argued that security should not be required because they had already provided security in an amount exceeding the likely cost of enforcing a costs order in their respective jurisdictions.

The court considered several factors in determining whether to order the plaintiffs to provide security for costs. Key factors included the plaintiffs' ability to pay costs, the likelihood of the plaintiffs succeeding in the action, and the potential prejudice to the defendant if security were not ordered. The court found that the plaintiffs had already provided security in an amount exceeding the likely cost of enforcing a costs order in their jurisdictions, and they appeared to have good prospects of success. The plaintiffs' first residence in California, and the second and third plaintiffs being incorporated in British Columbia, did not, in the court's view, warrant an order for additional security.

Based on these findings, the court held that ordering the plaintiffs to provide further security for costs was not necessary. The application for security was dismissed. The court did not make any orders regarding costs.