NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Karl Suleman Enterprizes Pty Limited (in liquidation) v Pham and Ors [2010] NSWSC 886
HEARING DATE(S) : 29 July 2010
JUDGMENT DATE : 13 August 2010
JUDGMENT OF : Schmidt J
CATCHWORDS : PROCEDURE - costs - security for costs - additional security for costs in accordance with s 1335 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and/or Rule 42.21 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 - company in liquidation - liquidator not party to proceedings - whether Court's jurisdiction is enlivened - whether defendants contributed to the plaintiff's financial position - whether there is strength in plaintiff's case - stultification - delay - further security in relation to past costs refused - further security in relation to future costs ordered - costs
Civil Procedure Act 2005 LEGISLATION CITED : Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005
CATEGORY : Procedural and other rulings
Dae Boong International Co Pty Ltd v Gray [2009] NSWCA 11 Green (as liquidator of Arimco Mining Pty Ltd) v CGU Insurance Ltd [2008] NSWCA 148; (2008) 67 ACSR 105 Idoport Pty Ltd v National Australia Bank Ltd [2001] NSWSC 744 Ibrahim v Pham [2005] NSWSC 246 CASES CITED : Ibrahim v Pham [2007] NSWCA 215 Jazabas Pty Ltd v Haddad [2007] NSWCA 291; (2007) 65 ACSR 276 Kavcor Pty Ltd v Kavanagh [2005] NSWSC 1163 Seven Network Limited v News Ltd [2007] FCA 1062; (2007) ATPR (Digest) 42-274 Suleman v R [2009] NSWCCA 70 Tim Barr Pty Ltd v Narui Gold Coast Pty Ltd [2009] NSWSC 563
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