In the ACT, the 'common situation' of an impecunious plaintiff, a difficult appeal on the facts, and potentially high costs is not of itself sufficient to justify an order for security for costs in personal injury appeals. Lawyers acting on a no-win no-fee basis are not 'people standing behind the proceeding' and their means cannot ordinarily be considered in determining whether to order security. However, where a successful appeal would provide no benefit to the appellant because damages would be entirely consumed by solicitor-client costs, there may be an arguable basis for treating the appeal as brought 'for the benefit of someone else'.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 14 later cases that cite this judgment.
6 of the 14 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.