Penson v Titan National Pty Ltd

Case [2018] NSWCA 44

Court of Appeal


Supreme Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Penson v Titan National Pty Ltd [2018] NSWCA 44
Hearing dates: On the papers
Decision date: 14 March 2018
Before: Simpson JA
Decision:

(1)   Notice of Motion filed by Kathryn Wood-Weber on 23 December 2015 in proceedings numbered 2014/373028 dismissed;

 

(2)   Notice of Motion filed by Kathryn Wood-Weber on 23 December 2015 in proceedings numbered 2015/188297 dismissed;

 

(3)   Notice of Motion filed by Kathryn Wood-Weber on 23 December 2015 in proceedings numbered 2015/190593 dismissed;

 

(4)   Notice of Motion filed by Kathryn Wood-Weber on 23 December 2015 in proceedings numbered 2015/231328 dismissed;

 (5)   Notice of Motion filed by Shirley Penson on 30 December 2015 in proceedings numbered 2015/231328 dismissed.
Catchwords: COSTS – party/party – self represented litigant – where self-represented litigant has been declared bankrupt – where no further action taken by the parties regarding costs application – no issue of principle
Cases Cited: Penson v Titan National Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] NSWCA 197
Penson v Titan National Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] NSWCA 403
Penson v Titan National Pty Ltd (No 4) [2015] NSWCA 350
Penson v Titan National Pty Ltd (No 5) [2015] NSWCA 405
Penson v Titan National Pty Ltd [2015] NSWCA 165
Penson v Titan National Pty Ltd [2015] NSWCA 404
Category:Costs
Parties:

2014/373028; 2015/188297:
Shirley Penson (Applicant)
Titan National Pty Ltd (First Respondent)
Kathryn Wood-Weber (Second Respondent)

 

2015/190593:
Shirley Penson (Applicant)
Titan National Pty Ltd (First Respondent)
Kathryn Wood-Weber (Second Respondent)
Supreme Court of New South Wales (Third Respondent)

  2015/231328
Shirley Penson (Applicant)
Titan National Pty Ltd (First Respondent)
Kathryn Wood-Weber (Second Respondent)
District Court of New South Wales (Third Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
N/A

  Solicitors:
N/A (Applicant)
Pure Legal (First and Second Respondents)
Crown Solicitor’s Office (Third Respondents)
File Number(s): 2014/373028; 2015/188297; 2015/190593; 2015/231328

Judgment

  1. SIMPSON JA: On 16 December 2015 this Court delivered three judgments:

  1. In Penson v Titan Titan National Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] NSWCA 403 the Court dismissed an application by Ms Shirley Penson for to leave to appeal against an order of Black J made on 12 June 2015. In Penson v Titan National Pty Ltd [2015] NSWCA 404 the Court dismissed an application by Ms Penson for judicial review of two earlier decisions of this Court: Penson v Titan National Pty Ltd [2015] NSWCA 165; Penson v Titan National Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] NSWCA 197. In Penson v Titan National Pty Ltd(No 5) [2015] NSWCA 405 the Court dismissed two summonses, in each of which Ms Penson sought leave to appeal against the same decision of the District Court, and a notice of motion in which she sought a stay, and other orders relating to orders made by Emmett AJA: Penson v Titan National Pty Ltd(No 4) [2015] NSWCA 350. In each case the Court ordered Ms Penson to pay the costs of the application.

  2. On 23 December 2015 solicitors acting for Kathryn Wood-Weber (the second respondent in each case) filed four notices of motion, in each case seeking orders that the costs be paid on an indemnity basis and as a gross sum. On 30 December 2015 Ms Penson filed a notice of motion seeking orders that “the judgment” delivered on 16 December 2015 be set aside or varied, and stay of the costs orders in those proceedings.

  3. In correspondence with the Court, on 6 May 2016 solicitors for Ms Wood-Weber advised the Registrar of this Court that Ms Penson had been declared bankrupt. That is supported by a note made by Kunc J in the Equity Division on 5 May, in proceedings entitled: Interlocutory application under Corporations Act: Shirley Penson (2013/002971345-013). His Honour noted that Mr Paul Leroy of Hall Chadwick had been appointed Ms Penson’s trustee in bankruptcy, and that he did not intend to proceed with any outstanding applications that had been commenced by Ms Penson.

  4. On 27 July 2016 the parties were invited by the Registrar to inform him of the course they proposed to take in relation to the matters, in particular whether Ms Wood-Weber intended to seek leave from the Federal Court to proceed with their application against Ms Penson for costs, and whether the trustee in bankruptcy elected to continue with the notice of motion she had filed.

  5. No reply has been received to this communication. In the circumstances it is appropriate that each notice of motion be dismissed. I so order.

Orders

  1. Notice of Motion filed by Kathryn Wood-Weber on 23 December 2015 in proceedings numbered 2014/373028 dismissed;

  2. Notice of Motion filed by Kathryn Wood-Weber on 23 December 2015 in proceedings numbered 2015/188297 dismissed;

  3. Notice of Motion filed by Kathryn Wood-Weber on 23 December 2015 in proceedings numbered 2015/190593 dismissed;

  4. Notice of Motion filed by Kathryn Wood-Weber on 23 December 2015 in proceedings numbered 2015/231328 dismissed;

  5. Notice of Motion filed by Shirley Penson on 30 December 2015 in proceedings numbered 2015/231328 dismissed.

**********

Details
AGLC
Penson v Titan National Pty Ltd [2018] NSWCA 44
Case
[2018] NSWCA 44
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Penson v Titan National Pty Ltd*, the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales considered applications for costs made by a self-represented litigant who had been declared bankrupt. The dispute concerned the appropriate orders for costs in circumstances where the litigant was bankrupt and no further action had been taken by the parties regarding the costs applications.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether to grant the costs applications made by the self-represented litigant, Ms. Penson, and Ms. Wood-Weber, in light of Ms. Penson's bankruptcy. The Court was required to determine if there was any principle to be applied in this specific context, particularly given the lack of further engagement from the parties on the costs issue.

The Court dismissed the notices of motion filed by both Ms. Wood-Weber and Ms. Penson. The reasoning for this decision was that there was no issue of principle to be determined by the Court in relation to the costs applications, especially given the bankruptcy of Ms. Penson and the subsequent lack of further action by the parties. Consequently, all applications for costs were dismissed.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) Notice of Motion filed by Kathryn Wood-Weber on 23 December 2015 in proceedings numbered 2014/373028 dismissed;

(2) Notice of Motion filed by Kathryn Wood-Weber on 23 December 2015 in proceedings numbered 2015/188297 dismissed;

(3) Notice of Motion filed by Kathryn Wood-Weber on 23 December 2015 in proceedings numbered 2015/190593 dismissed;

(4) Notice of Motion filed by Kathryn Wood-Weber on 23 December 2015 in proceedings numbered 2015/231328 dismissed;

(5) Notice of Motion filed by Shirley Penson on 30 December 2015 in proceedings numbered 2015/231328 dismissed.

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.