Napper v Stapleton (No 2) - [2025] FedCFamC2G 628

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Napper v Stapleton (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC2G 628

File number(s): BRG 208 of 2023

Judgment of: JUDGE MANOUSARIDIS

Date of judgment: 2 May 2025

Catchwords: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – Costs – where order made referring matter to mediation – where respondent was ordered to provide documents seven days before the scheduled date of the mediation – where respondent failed to comply with order but mediation nevertheless proceeded – whether in those circumstances the respondent should be ordered to pay the applicant’s costs of and in relation to the mediation – application dismissed because the applicant has not demonstrated that the respondent’s default caused the applicant to incur costs in relation to the mediation he would otherwise not have incurred – order made that parties pay their own costs of and in relation to the mediation.

Cases cited:
Innovative Agricultural Products Pty Ltd v Innovativ [1996] FCA 1697

Molina v Galloway [2022] FedCFamC2G 904

Division: General

Number of paragraphs: 12

Date of last submission/s: 17 January 2024

Date of hearing: Decided on the papers

Place: Sydney

Solicitor for the Applicant: Sharon Givoni Consulting

Solicitor for the Respondent: Transitional Legal Pty Ltd
ORDERS

BRG 208 of 2023

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:
JOHN NAPPER

Applicant

AND:
WILLIAM JOHN STAPLETON

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE MANOUSARIDIS

DATE OF ORDER:

2 MAY 2025

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The applicant’s application for an order that the respondent pay the applicant’s costs of and in relation to the mediation held on 3 November 2023 is dismissed.
2.The applicant and the respondent each pay his own costs of and in relation to the mediation held on 3 November 2023.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: The Court may vary or set aside a judgment or order to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.05(2)(g) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.05 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
INTRODUCTION

On 30 May 2023 I made an order referring this matter for mediation, and ordered that by no later than 7 days before the mediation was to be scheduled, the respondent, Mr Stapleton, was to provide to the applicant, Mr Napper:
a confidential summary document for the purposes of mediation only, setting out the following information:
a.total number sales of the Book (defined in paragraph 4 of the Concise Statement) (Sales).
b. total expenses incurred by the respondent in respect of the Sales.
c. total profits made by the respondent in respect of the Sales.
d. annexing business documents from the respondent which evidence the information referred to in the preceding subparagraphs.
The mediation was scheduled to occur on 3 November 2023 by video link, but Mr Stapleton did not provide…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Napper v Stapleton (No 2)

Details

AGLC: Napper v Stapleton (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC2G 628
Case: [2025] FedCFamC2G 628
Decision Date: 2 May 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Napper v Stapleton (No 2), the dispute involved intellectual property rights, specifically the ownership and use of certain designs. The case was heard in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. The applicant, Napper, sought to enforce a mediation order against the respondent, Stapleton, who had failed to provide documents as required by the court’s prior order. Despite Stapleton's non-compliance, the mediation proceeded as scheduled.

The primary legal issue was whether Stapleton should be held liable for the costs incurred by Napper as a result of his failure to comply with the document production order. Napper argued that Stapleton's non-compliance caused him to incur additional costs during the mediation process. The court had to determine whether Stapleton's actions warranted an order for him to pay Napper's mediation costs. The court also needed to consider the broader implications of such an order on the mediation process and the respective costs of the parties involved.

The court found that Napper had not demonstrated that Stapleton’s failure to comply with the document production order caused him to incur additional costs during the mediation. The court reasoned that the mediation proceeded despite the non-compliance, and Napper did not provide evidence that the lack of documents directly affected the mediation's outcome or cost. Consequently, the court dismissed Napper's application for costs against Stapleton. Instead, the court made an order that each party bear their own costs of and in relation to the mediation.

Orders