Levy v Bablis (No 2)

In *Levy v Bablis (No 2)*, the appellant sought the release of $125,000 paid into court as security for the costs of an appeal, following their unsuccessful outcome. The respondent, whose incurred costs exceeded $300,000, sought payment of this security to satisfy their entitlement to costs. The appeal was heard by Beazley P, Macfarlan and Meagher JJA.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the security for costs should be released to the unsuccessful appellant or paid to the respondent to meet their costs. The court was required to consider the fundamental purpose of security for costs in the context of an unsuccessful appeal and the respective claims of the parties.

The court reasoned that the fundamental purpose of security for costs is to protect a respondent from the inability of an appellant to satisfy an order for costs. Given that the appellant did not contend that the amount of security was likely to exceed the recoverable costs, the court found no impediment to ordering the release of the security to the respondent. Accordingly, the court ordered that the $125,000 paid into court by the appellant as security for costs be paid to the respondent. The appellant's application to discharge a confidentiality order in respect of an exhibit was refused, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of these applications.