Randall Pty Ltd v Willoughby City Council

Randall Pty Ltd and an individual applicant (the applicants) sought orders in the supervisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of New South Wales against Willoughby City Council (the respondent). The dispute concerned a summons filed by the applicants, with a half-day hearing scheduled for the following month. The respondent had filed a motion seeking security for its costs of the proceedings.

The primary legal issue before Basten JA was whether the respondent had established grounds for an order for security for costs against the applicants. This required consideration of the evidence presented regarding the financial position of the corporate applicant and whether any factors under rule 42.21 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (NSW) were established, particularly in relation to the likely costs of the proceedings.

Basten JA dismissed the respondent's motion for security for costs. The court found that there was insufficient evidence of the corporate applicant's impecuniosity and no evidence to satisfy the requirements of rule 42.21, including a lack of evidence regarding the likely costs of the proceedings. Consequently, the respondent had not discharged its onus to demonstrate that an order for security for costs should be made. The costs of the motion were made costs in the proceedings, and directions were given for the further conduct of the summons.