Costs in Winding Up: supporting creditors must show reasonable grounds to recover costs; petitioner's cost order set aside.

Costs in winding up petitions were assessed on the principle that successful parties are ordinarily entitled to costs while unsuccessful parties bear them; a creditor who appears only in support must demonstrate reasonable grounds to claim costs. The High Court reviewed the notice and practice for appearances, found supporting creditors had not adopted or prosecuted the petition and were unwilling to carry it forward, and held they had not shown entitlement to costs. The trial judge's order requiring the original petitioner to pay multiple sets of costs was set aside; no costs awarded to those creditors, while the voluntary liquidator is awarded appeal costs from company assets.

---

---

Issues: Whether the trial judge was entitled to order the original petitioner to pay the costs of all parties appearing in a petition for the winding up of a company where the petitioner declined to proceed and creditors who appeared had only supported (and did not undertake) the petition.

Analysis: The Court examined the form of notice issued for winding up petitions and the applicable practice regarding appearances and costs. The notice invited creditors desirous to oppose the petition to appear; supporting creditors in this Court's practice are not invited as of right in the same manner as under the English rules. The general principle applied is that the successful party is entitled to costs and an unsuccessful party is ordinarily liable; a creditor appearing in a winding up petition is not entitled to costs as of right and must show a reasonable ground for appearing. Here, the creditor-respondents appeared in support rather than to oppose and none were ultimately willing to adopt or carry the petition forward; the voluntary liquidator had agreed not to press for costs. Given these facts, the supporting creditors did not establish reasonable grounds entitling them to costs, and the judge's order requiring the petitioner to pay multiple sets of costs was not justified.

Conclusion: Appeal allowed; the order requiring the petitioner to pay costs to the creditor-respondents is set aside and no costs are awarded in favour of those creditors. The voluntary liquidator is entitled to his costs of the appeal out of the assets of the company.

---