Ipex ITG Pty Ltd & Ors v Vic

[2011] VSCA 134

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › Non-party costs orders
4. › Interest of non-party in outcome of litigation
5. › Whether potential beneficiary of discretionary trust with power of distribution has sufficient interest
6. › Whether trial judge's refusal to order costs against non-party attended with sufficient doubt
1. Appeal
2. › Leave to appeal
3. › Costs orders
4. › Discretionary decision
5. › Whether decision attended with sufficient doubt
6. › Whether substantial injustice would ensue
7. › Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic), s 17A(1)(b)
1. Appeal
2. › Appellate review of discretionary decisions
3. › Whether trial judge acted on wrong principle or failed to give weight to relevant considerations
4. › House v The King [1936] HCA 40

Quick Take

A potential beneficiary of a discretionary trust who also has a power of distribution may have a sufficient interest in the subject of litigation to support a non-party costs order. A trial judge who requires a 'direct' personal financial interest and discounts the significance of being a potential beneficiary with power of distribution may be acting on a wrong principle or failing to give sufficient weight to a relevant consideration.