Yates v Boland [2000] FCA 1895

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Yates v Boland & Ors [2000] FCA 1895

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Costs – order by trial judge that non-party pay indemnity costs – whether discretion miscarried – whether error of principle – whether failure to take into account material consideration – whether outcome unreasonable and unjust – whether indemnity costs order supported by evidence. Knight v F P Special Assets Limited (1992) 174 CLR 178, applied. Vestris v Cashman (1998) 72 SASR 449, considered. House v The King(1936) 55 CLR 499, applied. Symphony Group Plc v Hodgson [1994] QB 179, considered. Re Wilcox; ex parte Venture Industries Pty Ltd (1996) 141 ALR 727, cited. Colgate – Palmolive Company v Cussons Pty Limited (1993) 46 FCR 225, cited. IAN FRANCIS YATES v JOHN BOLAND, THEODORE SIMOS AND JOHN WEBSTER NG 717 OF 1997 O'LOUGHLIN, NORTH & WEINBERG JJ 21 DECEMBER 2000 MELBOURNE (VIA VIDEOLINK TO SYDNEY)

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NG 717 OF 1997

BETWEEN: IAN FRANCIS YATES

APPELLANT

AND: JOHN BOLAND

FIRST RESPONDENT

THEODORE SIMOS

SECOND RESPONDENT

JOHN WEBSTER

THIRD RESPONDENT

JUDGE: O'LOUGHLIN, NORTH, WEINBERG JJ

DATE OF ORDER: 21 DECEMBER 2000

WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE (VIA VIDEOLINK TO SYDNEY)

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal is dismissed. 2. The appellant is to pay the respondents' costs of the appeal. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NG 717 OF 1997

BETWEEN: IAN FRANCIS YATES

APPELLANT

AND: JOHN BOLAND

FIRST RESPONDENT

THEODORE SIMOS

SECOND RESPONDENT

JOHN WEBSTER