SSABR Pty Ltd v AMA Group Ltd - [2024] NSWCA 104

Court of Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: SSABR Pty Ltd v AMA Group Ltd [2024] NSWCA 104
Hearing dates: 6 May 2024
Date of orders: 7 May 2024
Decision date: 07 May 2024
Before: Payne JA
Decision:
(1) By 4pm on 14 May 2024, the appellants provide security for the respondents' costs of these appeal proceedings pursuant to section 1335 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), in the sum of $80,000, by payment of that sum into court or by provision of security in that amount in a form acceptable to the Registrar of the Court of Appeal.
(2) The matter is listed for directions before Payne JA at 9.30 am on Thursday 16 May 2024.
(3) If security for costs is lodged with the Court in accordance with order 1, the parties have leave to inform the associate of Payne JA of that matter, at which time the directions hearing in order 2 will be vacated.

Catchwords:
COSTS – Security for costs – appeal – under Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 1335 – where parties agreed order should be made – dispute solely on quantum – competing estimates of appropriate amount of security – where security sought in relation to notice of contention – where security sought in relation to past costs – whether professional costs assessor’s estimate to be preferred over solicitor’s security estimate

Legislation Cited:
Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 1335
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 51.50

Cases Cited:
Allco Funds Management Ltd (in liq) v Trust Company (RE Services) Ltd [2013] NSWSC 1450
Broadway Plaza Investments Pty Ltd v Broadway Plaza Pty Ltd [2019] NSWSC 1082
HP Mercantile Pty Ltd v Dierickx [2013] NSWCA 87
KDL Building Pty Ltd v Mount [2006] NSWSC 474
LSKF Holdings Pty Ltd v Shield Lifestone Holdings Pty Ltd [2018] NSWCA 109
McMillan v Coolah Home Base Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCA 172
Mualim v Dzelme [2020] NSWCA 333
Palermo Seafoods Pty Ltd v Lunapas Pty Ltd [2015] NSWCA 149
Pioneer Park Pty Ltd (In liq) v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [2007] NSWCA 344
Preston v Harbour Pacific Underwriting Management Pty Ltd [2007] NSWCA 247
Reddy v C&P Syndicate Pty Ltd [2013] NSWCA 425
Rickard Constructions Pty Ltd v Rickard Hails Moretti Pty Ltd [2008] NSWCA 283
SSABR Pty Ltd v AMA Group Ltd (No 2) [2024] NSWSC 24
Swift v McLeary [2013] NSWCA 173
Tyneside Property Management Pty Ltd v Hammersmith Management Pty Ltd [2014] NSWCA 417

Category: Procedural rulings
Parties: SSABR Pty Ltd (first appellant/first respondent on the motion)
HAAPRC Pty Ltd (second appellant/second respondent on the motion)
AMA Group Ltd (first respondent/first applicant on the motion)
AMA Group Solutions Pty Ltd (second respondent/second applicant on the motion)
Representation:
Counsel:

SK Hill (appellants/respondents on the motion)
S Fitzpatrick (respondents/applicants on the motion)

Solicitors:
CBD Law (appellants/respondents on the motion)
K&L Gates (respondents/applicants on the motion)

File Number(s): 2023/463461
Publication restriction: Nil
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

Supreme Court…

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 SSABR Pty Ltd v AMA Group 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: [2024] NSWCA 104
Decision Date: 07 May 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the appeal before Payne JA of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, SSABR Pty Ltd (appellants) sought to challenge a decision concerning security for costs. The dispute between SSABR Pty Ltd and AMA Group Ltd (respondents) was not about whether security for costs should be ordered, but rather the quantum of that security. The parties had agreed that an order for security for costs should be made, but they held competing estimates for the appropriate amount.

The central legal issue before the court was to determine the quantum of security for costs to be provided by the appellants. This involved considering whether the security should encompass costs related to a notice of contention and past costs. A further question arose as to whether the estimate provided by a professional costs assessor should be preferred over the estimate provided by the solicitors for the respondents.

Payne JA determined that security for costs should be ordered in the sum of $80,000. The reasoning involved weighing the competing estimates and considering the scope of the security sought. The court ordered that the appellants provide this security by 4pm on 14 May 2024, either by payment into court or by providing security in a form acceptable to the Registrar of the Court of Appeal. A directions hearing was scheduled for 16 May 2024, which would be vacated if the security was lodged as ordered.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) By 4pm on 14 May 2024, the appellants provide security for the respondents' costs of these appeal proceedings pursuant to section 1335 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), in the sum of $80,000, by payment of that sum into court or by provision of security in that amount in a form acceptable to the Registrar of the Court of Appeal.

(2) The matter is listed for directions before Payne JA at 9.30 am on Thursday 16 May 2024.

(3) If security for costs is lodged with the Court in accordance with order 1, the parties have leave to inform the associate of Payne JA of that matter, at which time the directions hearing in order 2 will be vacated.

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	SSABR Pty Ltd v AMA Group Ltd [2024] NSWCA 104
Hearing dates:	6 May 2024
Date of orders:	7 May 2024
Decision date:	07 May 2024
Before:	Payne JA
Decision:	(1) By 4pm on 14 May 2024, the appellants provide security for the respondents' costs of these appeal proceedings pursuant to section 1335 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), in the sum of $80,000, by payment of that sum into court or by provision of security in that amount in a form acceptable to the Registrar of the Court of Appeal. (2) The matter is listed for directions before Payne JA at 9.30 am on Thursday 16 May 2024. (3) If security for costs is lodged with the Court in accordance with order 1, the parties have leave to inform the associate of Payne JA of that matter, at which time the directions hearing in order 2 will be vacated.
Catchwords:	COSTS – Security for costs – appeal – under Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 1335 – where parties agreed order should be made – dispute solely on quantum – competing estimates of appropriate amount of security – where security sought in relation to notice of contention – where security sought in relation to past costs – whether professional costs assessor’s estimate to be preferred over solicitor’s security estimate
Legislation Cited:	Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 1335 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 51.50
Cases Cited:	Allco Funds Management Ltd (in liq) v Trust Company (RE Services) Ltd [2013] NSWSC 1450 Broadway Plaza Investments Pty Ltd v Broadway Plaza Pty Ltd [2019] NSWSC 1082 HP Mercantile Pty Ltd v Dierickx [2013] NSWCA 87 KDL Building Pty Ltd v Mount [2006] NSWSC 474 LSKF Holdings Pty Ltd v Shield Lifestone Holdings Pty Ltd [2018] NSWCA 109 McMillan v Coolah Home Base Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCA 172 Mualim v Dzelme [2020] NSWCA 333 Palermo Seafoods Pty Ltd v Lunapas Pty Ltd [2015] NSWCA 149 Pioneer Park Pty Ltd (In liq) v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [2007] NSWCA 344 Preston v Harbour Pacific Underwriting Management Pty Ltd [2007] NSWCA 247 Reddy v C&P Syndicate Pty Ltd [2013] NSWCA 425 Rickard Constructions Pty Ltd v Rickard Hails Moretti Pty Ltd [2008] NSWCA 283 SSABR Pty Ltd v AMA Group Ltd (No 2) [2024] NSWSC 24 Swift v McLeary [2013] NSWCA 173 Tyneside Property Management Pty Ltd v Hammersmith Management Pty Ltd [2014] NSWCA 417
Category:	Procedural rulings
Parties:	SSABR Pty Ltd (first appellant/first respondent on the motion) HAAPRC Pty Ltd (second appellant/second respondent on the motion) AMA Group Ltd (first respondent/first applicant on the motion) AMA Group Solutions Pty Ltd (second respondent/second applicant on the motion)
Representation:	Counsel: SK Hill (appellants/respondents on the motion) S Fitzpatrick (respondents/applicants on the motion) Solicitors: CBD Law (appellants/respondents on the motion) K&L Gates (respondents/applicants on the motion)
File Number(s):	2023/463461
Publication restriction:	Nil
Decision under appeal	Court or tribunal: Supreme Court…