› Whether beneficiaries of discretionary trust are potential sources of security
› Whether solicitors acting on speculative basis are potential sources of security
Practice and Procedure
› Costs
› Security for costs
› Stultification
› Whether evidence of unavailability of litigation funding or insurance required
› Whether judicial notice may be taken of impracticability of funding
Quick Take
1Beneficiaries of a discretionary trust are not persons 'standing behind' or 'likely to benefit from' litigation who can be required to provide security for costs, because they may never see any benefit from the litigation even if successful.
2Where the most obvious avenues of alternative funding (loans, litigation funding, adverse costs insurance) are plainly unrealistic given the plaintiff's impecuniosity and the non-monetary nature of the claim, there is no evidentiary lacuna requiring the plaintiff to marshal evidence concerning all possible funding avenues.
Case Details
Citation[2024] NSWSC 133
CourtNSWSC
JurisdictionNew South Wales
Unlock so much more with Barrister AI
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.
