Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Coshott v Prentice [2017] FCAFC 229 Appeal from: Coshott v Prentice (No 2) [2017] FCA 394
File number: NSD 746 of 2017
Judges: LOGAN, KERR AND FARRELL JJ
Date of judgment: 21 November 2017
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – costs – application for review of taxation of costs – construction of r 40.27 of Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – whether trial judge erred by finding no error where taxing officer disallowed costs where no objection taken – r 40.27 of Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – appeal dismissed
Legislation: Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 40.27, r 40.29, r 40.30, r 40.31
Cases cited: Ann Street Mezzanine Pty Ltd (in liq) v Beck (2013) 215 FCR 150 Cassimatis v Australian Securities and Investments Commission (2016) 334 ALR 350 Coshott v Crouch [2017] FCAFC 135
Date of hearing: 21 November 2017
Registry: New South Wales
Division: General Division
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: General and Personal Insolvency
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 16
Counsel for the Appellants: Mr MW Young SC
Solicitor for the Appellants: Murphy Lyons Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr J Jackson
Solicitor for the Respondent: O'Neill Partners
ORDERS NSD 746 of 2017
BETWEEN: RONALD MICHAEL COSHOTT First Appellant
FEWIN PTY LTD ACN 051 132 453 Second Appellant
AND: MAXWELL WILLIAM PRENTICE Respondent
JUDGES: LOGAN, KERR AND FARRELL JJ DATE OF ORDER: 21 NOVEMBER 2017
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate