//
[2009] QCA 55
General information, not legal advice.
Court of Appeal (Qld)
2009-03-13
Keane, Holmes and Fraser JJA, Judgment of the Court
Original judgment source is linked above.
Zoe will write a short plain-English brief of this judgment and email it to you: what it was about, what the court decided and why. It can take up to a minute.
General information, not legal advice.
Or create a free account to save it and ask Zoe follow-up questions.
Source: Queensland Judgments (Supreme Court Library Queensland) (www.queenslandjudgments.com.au). Converted to plain text by ZoeLaw. Not the official version.
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION: ASIC v Jorgensen & Ors [2009] QCA 55
PARTIES: AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENTS COMMISSION (applicant) v ALAN BRADLEY JORGENSEN (first respondent/respondent) ZHI LI also known as LYNA JORGENSEN (second respondent/not a party to the application) JIM'S WATER TANKS PTY LTD ACN 123 918 721 (third respondent/not a party to the application) ROBERT WILLIAM MORTON (fourth respondent/not a party to the application) (fifth respondent/not a party to the application)
FILE NO/S: Appeal No 12536 of 2008 / SC No 7032 of 2007
DIVISION: Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING: Miscellaneous Application – Civil
ORIGINATING COURT: Supreme Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED ON: 13 March 2009
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
HEARING DATE: 9 February 2009
JUDGES: Keane, Holmes and Fraser JJA / Judgment of the Court
ORDER: Respondent pay the applicant's costs of and incidental to the appeal and the application to strike out
CATCHWORDS: PROCEDURE – COSTS – GENERAL RULE - COSTS FOLLOW THE EVENT – COSTS OF WHOLE ACTION – GENERALLY – where applicant succeeded in its application to strike out respondent's appeal – where applicant sought order that respondent pay costs of and incidental to appeal and strike out application – where general rule that costs follow the event – whether grounds to depart from general rule exist / Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 681(1)
COUNSEL: P J Davis SC and J W Peden for the respondent/applicant / The appellant/respondent appeared on his own behalf
SOLICITORS: Australian Securities & Investment Commission for the respondent/applicant / The appellant/respondent appeared on his own behalf
THE COURT: On 17 February 2009 this Court struck out Mr Jorgensen's notice of appeal on the basis that his appeal was incompetent.
ASIC now seeks an order that Mr Jorgensen pay its costs of the appeal and of the application to strike it out.
The usual rule as to the disposition of costs of a proceeding is that the costs follow the event.1
There is no reason apparent to the Court why the usual rule should not be applied in this case. The only submission made by Mr Jorgensen on the issue as to the costs of proceedings in this Court was to inform this Court that he proposes to seek special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia from this Court's decision of 17 February 2009. That is no reason not to apply the usual rule in relation to the disposition of costs.
Accordingly, it is ordered that Mr Jorgensen pay ASIC's costs of and incidental to the appeal and the application to strike it out.
See r 681(1) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld). ↩
ASIC
Jorgensen & Ors [2009] QCA 55