Australian Securities and Investments Commission, in the matter of Whitebox Trading Pty Ltd v Whitebox Trading Pty Ltd (No 2) [2017] FCA 385

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Australian Securities and Investments Commission, in the matter of Whitebox Trading Pty Ltd v Whitebox Trading Pty Ltd (No 2) [2017] FCA 385 File number: NSD 383 of 2016

Judge: GLEESON J

Date of judgment: 13 April 2017

Catchwords: COSTS – application to vary order that costs follow the event – whether costs in an application for a ruling under s 192A of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) regarding a claim of privilege by the respondent should be costs in the cause – no reason to depart from the ordinary rule that costs follow the event – circumstances do not warrant variation

Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Federal Court Rules 2011

Cases cited: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Allphones Retail Pty Ltd (No 3) [2009] FCA 1075; (2009) 259 ALR 541 Guess?, Inc v Guccio Gucci SpA [2016] FCA 1218 His Eminence Metropolitan Petar, Diocesan Bishop of the Macedonian Orthodox Church of Australia and New Zealand v The Macedonian Orthodox Community Church St Petka Inc (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 142 J & A Vaughan Super Pty Ltd (Trustee) v Becton Property Group Ltd (No 4) [2015] FCA 218 James v Commonwealth Bank of Australia (No 2) [2015] FCA 599 JT Stratford Ltd v Lindley [1969] 1 WLR 1547 Kernahan v ACN 003 134 475 Pty Ltd [2010] NSWSC 51; (2010) 77 NSWLR 452 Media Ocean Limited v Optus Mobile Pty Ltd (No 6) [2009] FCA 1319 NA & J Investments Pty Ltd v Minister Administering Water Management Act 2000 (No 4) [2012] NSWLEC 120 Public Trustee v Nash (1921) 38 WN (NSW) 142 The Council of the New South Wales Bar Association v Franklin [2014] NSWCA 329