Chapman v Luminis Pty Ltd (No 7) [2002] FCA 1098

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Chapman v Luminis Pty Ltd (No 7) [2002] FCA 1098 COSTS – non-party costs order sought by successful respondents - applicants people of straw – whether the non-party played an active part in the conduct of the litigation – whether the non-party or some person on whose behalf it was acting or had been appointed had an interest in the subject matter of the litigation – whether interests of justice require that the order be made. Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 43 Chapman v Luminis Pty Ltd & Ors (No 5) [2001] FCA 1106 cited Knight v F. P. Special Assets Ltd (1992) 174 CLR 178 applied Caboolture Park Shopping Centre Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) v White Industries (Qld) Pty Ltd (1993) 45 FCR 224 cited McKewins Hairdressing and Beauty Supplies Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (2000) 171 ALR 335 cited Chapman v Luminis (1998) 86 FCR 513 cited Symphony Group Plc v Hodgson [1994] QB 179 distinguished Vestris v Cashman (1998) 72 SASR 449 distinguished Yates v Boland [2000] FCA 1895 followed Gore v Justice Corporation [2002] FCAFC 83 followed Ulowski v Miller (1968) SASR 277 followed THOMAS LINCOLN CHAPMAN, WENDY JENNIFER CHAPMAN & BINALONG PTY LTD (RECEIVERS & MANAGERS APPOINTED) (IN LIQUIDATION) v LUMINIS PTY LTD, DEANE JOANNE FERGIE, CHERYL ANNE SAUNDERS, ROBERT EDWARD TICKNER & COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA No SG 33 of 1997 von DOUSSA J ADELAIDE 10 SEPTEMBER 2002

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY SG 33 OF 1997

BETWEEN: THOMAS LINCOLN CHAPMAN

FIRST APPLICANT

WENDY JENNIFER CHAPMAN

SECOND APPLICANT

BINALONG PTY LTD (RECEIVERS & MANAGERS APPOINTED (IN LIQUIDATION)

THIRD APPLICANT

AND: LUMINIS PTY LTD

FIRST RESPONDENT