Vintage Marine Art Pty Ltd v Henderson & Cremer (No 2)

Vintage Marine Art Pty Ltd (the applicant) sought leave to appeal against orders made by Rothman J on 14 November 2018, which had increased an earlier security for costs order made against it. The dispute concerned the adequacy of security for costs in proceedings where the plaintiff had provided a personal undertaking to pay costs.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the primary judge erred in increasing the security for costs order three years after the original order was made, particularly in light of a personal undertaking given by a director of the plaintiff company to be personally answerable for any costs awarded against the plaintiff. The court also considered whether leave to appeal should be granted.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the primary judge had erred in increasing the security for costs. The court reasoned that the personal undertaking provided by Gina Edwards, a director of the plaintiff, was sufficient to satisfy the requirements for security for costs. Consequently, the court set aside the orders of Rothman J and dismissed the defendant's claim for increased security for costs. The applicant was granted leave to appeal, and the respondents were ordered to pay the applicant's costs of the appeal.