Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Brecher v Barrack Investments Pty Limited (No 3) [2020] FCA 1331 File number: NSD 1507 of 2017
Judgment of: THAWLEY J
Date of judgment: 17 September 2020
Catchwords: COSTS – application for indemnity costs – whether unreasonable for respondents to be subjected to expenditure of any costs – whether applicants' failure to accept a Calderbank offer was unreasonable – consideration of alternative orders sought in the event indemnity costs were not granted – application dismissed
Legislation: Legal Profession Uniform Law Australian Solicitors' Conduct Rules 2015 (NSW) rr 8, 9
Cases cited: Brecher v Barrack Investments Pty Limited (No 2) [2020] FCA 911 Melbourne City Investments Pty Ltd v Treasury Wine Estates Limited (No 2) [2017] FCAFC 116
Division: General Division
Registry: New South Wales
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: Commercial Contracts, Banking, Finance and Insurance
Number of paragraphs: 31
Date of last submission: 28 August 2020
Date of hearing: Determined on the papers
Solicitor for the Applicants: Mr P Taylor of ICL Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr G George
Solicitor for the Respondents: Pateman Legal & Corporate Services
ORDERS NSD 1507 of 2017
BETWEEN: ERIC SCOTT BRECHER First Applicant
ERIC BRECHER PTY LIMITED Second Applicant
AND: BARRACK INVESTMENTS PTY LIMITED ACN 083 617 421 First Respondent
DELBEST PTY LIMITED ACN 003 236 502 Second Respondent
MOHAMAD KHALID RASHID Third Respondent
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