FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| SIMS v RM CAPITAL PTY LTD & ANOR (No.2) | [2015] FCCA 149 |
| Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Extension of time – factors to be taken into account – whether explanation for delay. PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – Lawyers – duties and liabilities – solicitor and client – conflict of interest. COSTS – Whether to suspend costs order – taxation. |
| Legislation: Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth), s.40(1)(g) Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999 (Cth), s.15(a) Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth), rr.3.05, 12.02, 12.03 Federal Magistrates Court Amendment Rules 2012 (No. 1) (Cth), r.1 sch.1 item 6 Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) |
| Applicant: | DOUGLAS ARTHUR SIMS |
| First Respondent: | RM CAPITAL PTY LTD |
| Second Respondent: | JAMES BRADLEY RICHARDSON |
| File Number: | PEG 393 of 2013 |
| Judgment of: | Judge Antoni Lucev |
| Hearing date: | 23 January 2015 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 23 January 2015 |
| Delivered at: | Perth |
| Delivered on: | 23 January 2015 |
REPRESENTATION
| For the Applicant: | In person. |
| Counsel for the Respondents: | Mr NC Ebbs |
| Solicitors for the Respondents: | Bennett + Co |
ORDERS
In relation to the application in case filed 23 January 2015:
(a)the time for compliance with order 2 of the Court’s orders of 22 December 2014 be extended to 26 February 2015; and
(b)that otherwise the application in a case be dismissed.
The respondents have leave to apply forthwith for taxation of their costs with respect to order 3 of the Court’s orders of 22 December 2014, with those costs to be taxed by a Registrar as…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Sims v RM Capital Pty Ltd (No 2) 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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2015] FCCA 149
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine whether to grant an extension of time for the applicant to comply with a prior order, considering the explanation for the delay. Additionally, the court had to assess the criteria for issuing a pro bono referral certificate, specifically whether the applicant's financial means, the nature and complexity of the proceeding, and any steps already taken to obtain legal advice warranted such a referral. The court also considered the respondents' application for taxation of their costs.
His Honour granted the extension of time, noting the applicant's explanation for the delay. However, the application for a pro bono referral certificate was dismissed. The court reasoned that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient grounds for the referral, implying that the factors required for such a certificate were not met. The court also allowed the respondents to proceed with the taxation of their costs related to a specific prior order and ordered the applicant to pay a sum of $2730 towards those costs by a specified date.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. In relation to the application in case filed 23 January 2015:
(a) the time for compliance with order 2 of the Court’s orders of 22 December 2014 be extended to 26 February 2015; and
(b) that otherwise the application in a case be dismissed.
2. The respondents have leave to apply forthwith for taxation of their costs with respect to order 3 of the Court’s orders of 22 December 2014, with those costs to be taxed by a Registrar as soon as reasonably practicable .
3. The applicant pay the respondents’ costs in the sum of $2730 by 23 February 2015.
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.