Hill v Zuda Pty Ltd as trustee for the Holly Superannuation Fund

[2020] WASCA 87

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. › Appellant's impecuniosity
5. › Whether substantial risk appellant would not meet adverse costs order
6. › Whether order would stifle appeal
7. › Amount of security
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Security for costs
3. › Appeal
4. › Principles governing exercise of discretion
5. › Respondent's stronger position on appeal
6. › Presumption judgment below correct

Quick Take

The case applies the established principles governing security for costs on appeal as outlined in George 218 Pty Ltd v Bank of Queensland Limited. A respondent on appeal is in a stronger position than a defendant at first instance. Where there is a substantial risk the appellant cannot meet an adverse costs order, security may be ordered provided the court is not satisfied the order would stifle the appeal. The court will consider whether the appellant can obtain funds by loan or otherwise, including from a spouse.