Osprey Industries v Hallam

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Citation: [1992] PNGLR 557
• Date: 01 April 1992
• Court: National Court
• Year: 1992

National Court: Salika J

Judgment Delivered: 1 April 1992

1 Costs—security for costs—where plaintiff company in financial difficulties—may not be able to pay costs of defendant if unsuccessful in proceedings—court's discretion whether or not to order security for costs—amount of security within court's discretion—s395(1) Companies Act (Ch146)

2 Costs—security for costs—amount within court's discretion

3 Reynolds v Walcott [1985] PNGLR 316, Lindsay Parkinson Co Ltd v Triplan Ltd [1973] QB 609 and Loreva Pty Ltd v CEFA Associated Agencies Pty Ltd (1982) 7 ACLR 164 referred to

___________________________

Salika J: This is an application for security for costs by way of a notice of motion. The applicants/defendants move the court for orders that:

1. the plaintiff forthwith deposit with the Registrar of the National Court the sum of K20,000.00, being security for costs;

2. the time for entry of the order be abridged to the time of entry by the Registrar, which shall take place forthwith; and

3. such other orders as the court deems fit?

The application is based on s395(1) of the Companies Act (Ch146). S395(1) says:—

"395(1) Where a company is plaintiff is an action or other legal proceedings, a court having jurisdiction in the matter may, if it appears by credible testimony that there is reason to believe that the company will be unable to pay costs of the defendant if he is successful in his defence, require sufficient security to be given for...