The Court held that an interested party (Fitzroy) that took an adversarial approach to a s 444GA Corporations Act application — filing seven affidavits in opposition, cross-examining witnesses, and raising corporate governance issues beyond the adequacy of the plaintiffs' evidence — went beyond what was required to present facts and address issues the court needed to consider, warranting a costs order against it under r 2.13(2). The Court granted a special costs order lifting Table B limits of the Costs Determination given the unusual difficulty and complexity of the matter (expert evidence, voluminous documentation, multi-day hearings), but declined to lift the Table A hourly rate caps, reaffirming that a party's choice to engage lawyers at rates exceeding the scale does not of itself justify lifting rate limits.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.