BEESON v CARRELLO As Liquidator of GECKO MANAGMENT PTY LTD (in liq)

[2010] WASCA 155

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › Discontinuance of appeal
4. › Whether normal costs rule should be displaced
5. › Whether appellant acted reasonably in commencing and maintaining appeal
6. › Supreme Court (Court of Appeal) Rules 2005 (WA), r 59(4)
1. Corporations
2. › Winding up
3. › Examination summonses
4. › Abuse of process
5. › Whether predominant purpose test satisfied
6. › Whether conflict of interest of liquidator's solicitor constitutes abuse of process
7. › Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 596A

Quick Take

Under r 59(4) of the Supreme Court (Court of Appeal) Rules 2005 (WA), an appellant who discontinues an appeal will not be relieved of the obligation to pay the respondent's costs where the appeal was unreasonably commenced or where the appellant unreasonably compelled the respondent to incur further costs after the basis for the appeal was removed. A solicitor's conflict of interest in conducting an examination under s 596A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) is a separate question from whether the examination order should be set aside for abuse of process.