SCANLAN & ANOR -v- GREENPORT NOMINEES PTY LTD & ORS [2001] WASC 307

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2001] WASC 307
Case No:	COR:308/1998	Heard:	6 NOVEMBER 2001
Coram:	WHITE AUJ	Delivered:	9/11/01
No of pages:	14	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Application dismissed Costs reserved
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	LAWRENCE SCANLAN L J SCANLAN & ASSOCIATES PTY LTD GREENPORT NOMINEES PTY LTD (ACN 067 084 057) PETER JERMYN CAPITAL ALLIANCE PTY LTD (ACN 008 802 757)
Catchwords:	Application by respondents for an order that security for costs be provided by the applicants Application listed during the week proceeding the date for the trial listed for 10 days Turns on own facts
Legislation:	Nil
Case References:	Aspendale Pastoral Co Pty Ltd v WJ Drever Pty Ltd [1983] 7 ACLR 937 Black & Anor v Brockley Investments Ltd, unreported; FCt SCt of WA; Library No 930039; 27 January 1993 Blackbird Entertainment Pty Ltd & Anor v I O Research Pty Ltd, unreported; WASC; Library No 980297; 2 June 1998 Brown v Haig [1995] 2 Ch 379 Chester & Fein Property Developments Pty Ltd v Candam Investments Pty Ltd & Anor (1985) ATPR 40-618 Lagarna Pty Ltd & Ors v Bridge Wholesale Acceptance Corporation (Australia) Ltd [1995] 1 VR 150 Laundry Coin-Wash Nominees Pty Ltd v Dunlop Olympic Ltd & Ors (1985) 7 ATPR 40-584 Leary & Anor v Tasmanian Kit Homes Pty Ltd, unreported; SCt of Tas; Library No BC9506634; 15 August 1995 MA Productions Pty Ltd v Austarama Television Pty Ltd [1982] 1 ACLC 404 RP Securities Pty Ltd v Martin, unreported; Library No 3687; 7 August 1986 Sir Lindsay Parkinson & Co Ltd v Triplan Limited [1973] 2 All ER 273 Temwood Holdings Pty Ltd v Oliver [1999] WASC 251 Warren Mitchell Pty Ltd v Australian Maritime Officers' Union (1993) 12 ACSR 1 Bell Wholesale Corp Co Pty Ltd v Gates Export Corp (No 2) [1984] 8 ACLR 588 BPM Pty Ltd v HPM Pty Ltd (1996) 14 ACLC 857 Brocklebank & Co v The King's Lynn Steamship Co (1878) 3 CPD 365 Brundza v Robbie & Co (No 2) (1952) 88 CLR 171 Caruso Australia Pty Ltd v Porter (Aust) Pty Ltd (1984) 1 FCR 311 Cowell v Taylor [1885] 31 Ch D 34 Crypta Fuels Pty Ltd v Svelte Corp Pty Ltd (1995) 19 ACSR 68 Doran v Cottam, unreported; FCA; No WAG 83 of 1994; Fed No 439/95; 27 June 1995 Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council v Four Seasons Construction Pty Ltd [1999] WASC 36 Espanol Holdings Pty Ltd v Banning [1999] WASC 49 Fexuto v Bosjnak Holdings Pty Ltd (1998) 28 ACSR 688 Harpur v Ariadne Australia Pty Ltd (1984) 2 ACLC Intercraft Cabinets v Sampas Pty Ltd (1997) 18 WAR 306 John Bishop (Caterers) Ltd v National Union Bank Ltd [1973] 1 All ER 707 John J Starr (Real Estate) Pty Ltd v Robert R Andrew (A'asia) Pty Ltd (1991) 6 ACSR 63 Mantaray v Pty Ltd v…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Scanlan v Greenport Nominees Pty Ltd and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2001] WASC 307
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter involves a claim for relief against alleged oppression by an architect who was involved in the original development of the Indiana Teahouse in Cottesloe. The application was commenced in 1998 and the matter is listed for hearing for ten days commencing on 12 November 2001. The respondents seek an order for the provision by both applicants of security for costs. The court exercised its discretion against the grant of the order that the applicants furnish security for the respondents' costs of the action.

Orders