Morris v Hanley

[2000] NSWSC 957

Supreme Court of NSW

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Security for costs
3. › Inherent jurisdiction
4. › Factors to be considered
5. › Whether action partly motivated by harassment
6. › Whether plaintiff impecunious
7. › Whether order would stultify proceedings
8. › Whether plaintiff's case has reasonably good prospects
1. Equity
2. › Fiduciary obligations
3. › Duty to inform
4. › Whether directors and controlling shareholders owed fiduciary duty to employee to inform her of rights under co-operative scheme
5. › Whether novel fiduciary duty arguable
1. Equity
2. › Maxims
3. › Equity will not assist a volunteer
4. › Exceptions to the maxim
5. › Whether equity assists volunteer where defendant's conscience affected by taking advantage of own wrong
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Security for costs
3. › Part 53 rule 2(a) Supreme Court Rules
4. › Plaintiff resident in another Australian State
5. › Whether rule applies to interstate residents
6. › Constitution, s 117

Quick Take

The inherent power to order security for costs is directed at preventing vexatious and harassing proceedings, and the so-called 'poverty rule' is merely one factor in the overall assessment, not a fundamental bar to ordering security. Evidence that litigation is partly motivated by harassment is a significant factor favouring security, even where the claim is arguable. The maxim that equity will not assist a volunteer admits of at least seven exceptions, including where declining to assist would allow the defendant to take advantage of his own wrong.