Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Cassimatis (Costs) [2023] FCA 613

Federal Court of Australia

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Cassimatis (Costs) [2023] FCA 613 File number(s): QUD 574 of 2010 QUD 247 of 2018

Judgment of: SARAH C DERRINGTON J

Date of judgment: 9 June 2023

Catchwords: COSTS – interlocutory application for lump sum costs order – where respondents have been ordered to pay several costs orders over protracted litigation PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – whether Court has jurisdiction to determine interlocutory application for lump sum costs order – whether application for lump sum costs order previously determined – whether Court is functus officio – whether applicants were "too late" in bringing application – whether application is incompetent where single judge is asked to revisit order for costs made by the Full Court

Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 25(1), 25(2B)(ab), 43(1), s 43(3)(d) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 40.02(b)

Cases cited: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Colgate-Palmolive Pty Ltd [2020] FCA 598 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Shell Co of Australia Ltd (1997) 72 FCR 386 Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Cassimatis (No 9) [2018] FCA 385 Beach Petroleum NL & Anor v Johnson (No 2) [1995] FCA 350; 57 FCR 119 Caboolture Park Shopping Centre Pty Ltd (in liq) v White Industries (Qld) Pty Ltd (1993) 45 FCR 224 Cassimatis v Australian Securities and Investment Commission [2020] FCAFC 52 Dunstan v Seymour [2006] FCA 917 Hamersley Iron Pty Limited v The National Competition Council [2008] FCA 598 LFDB v Ms S M (No 2) [2018] FCA 2062 Mineralogy Pty Ltd v Sino Iron Pty Ltd (No 7) [2018] FCA 1217 Su v Australian Fisheries Management Authority (No 3) [2008] FCA 2018