Pi v Zhou

The Court of Appeal of New South Wales, constituted by Basten and Payne JJA and Sackville AJA, considered an application for review of an order made by a single judge concerning security for costs. The dispute involved Mr Pi, the applicant, and Mr Zhou and Mrs Zhao, the respondents, in proceedings before the Court.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the single judge had erred in refusing to order Mr Pi to provide security for the costs of Mr Zhou and Mrs Zhao in the appeal proceedings. This involved an assessment of the likelihood of Mr Pi being able to pay the respondents' costs if the appeal were unsuccessful, and whether it was just and reasonable to make such an order.

The Court reasoned that the single judge had failed to adequately consider the evidence presented regarding Mr Pi's financial position and the potential for him to be unable to satisfy a costs order. Applying the principles governing applications for security for costs, the Court found that there was a sufficient risk that the respondents would be unable to recover their costs. Consequently, the Court set aside the single judge's orders and ordered Mr Pi to provide security for the respondents' costs in the sum of $12,000. Until this security was provided, the proceedings were stayed, with a further hearing scheduled to address dismissal of the proceedings if security was not furnished. Mr Pi was also ordered to pay a portion of the respondents' costs associated with the application for review.