Zhao v Bonheur Holdings Pty Ltd atf Bonheur Holdings Trust (No 2)

In the case of Zhao v Bonheur Holdings Pty Ltd atf Bonheur Holdings Trust (No 2), the plaintiff sought indemnity costs from the defendant for expenses incurred during a freezing order application. The application related to assets that the plaintiff claimed were wrongfully transferred by the defendant. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issue the court needed to address was whether the plaintiff was entitled to indemnity costs from the defendant due to perceived weaknesses in the plaintiff's evidence. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the costs incurred by the defendant in responding to the freezing order application should be paid forthwith or deferred until the final hearing of the case.

The court examined the plaintiff's evidence and found that while there were some unsatisfactory aspects, these did not constitute a substantial portion of the overall evidence or the time taken during the hearing. The court concluded that the application for the freezing order was not an abuse of process and did not contravene section 56 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW). Consequently, the court refused the plaintiff's application for indemnity costs. However, given that the freezing order application represented the completion of a discrete aspect of the proceedings, the court ordered the defendant to pay the costs forthwith.

The final orders of the court were that the defendant was not required to pay indemnity costs to the plaintiff. Instead, the defendant was ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs of the freezing order application forthwith. This decision ensures that the defendant bears the costs associated with the completed aspect of the proceedings, while the remaining costs will be determined at the final hearing.