Traynor v Cunningham

[2017] WASCA 125

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Security for costs
3. › Appeal
4. › Impecunious appellants
5. › Whether order for security would stultify the appeal
6. › Third party funding by trade union
7. › Whether funder's unwillingness to provide security established
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Security for costs
3. › Appeal
4. › Relevant factors
5. › Prospects of success
6. › Challenges to findings of primary fact
7. › Burden imposed on respondent by number and nature of grounds
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Security for costs
3. › Appeal
4. › Non-party costs orders
5. › Whether prospect of costs order against non-party funder makes security order redundant
6. › Knight v FP Special Assets Ltd (1992) 174 CLR 178

Quick Take

Practitioners acting for impecunious appellants funded by third parties (such as unions) should ensure they adduce evidence of the funder's unwillingness to provide security, not merely evidence that the funder has not agreed to do so, as the absence of such evidence will weigh against a finding of stultification.