Gibson v Rivers-McCombs (No 2) [2014] FCA 540

Gibson v Rivers-McCombs (No 2) [2014] FCA 540

The applicants' conduct in instituting and prosecuting the proceedings was unreasonable, as the grounds of review lacked merit and no reasonable explanation was provided for participation. This caused the second respondent to incur costs, justifying an order for costs against the applicants under s 85A of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Costs Determination After Dismissal of Application
Outcome
Applicants ordered to pay costs
Legal Topics
['costs' 'indigenous Land Use Agreement' 'standing']
['practice and Procedure' 'native Title'] ['costs' 'indigenous Land Use Agreement' 'standing']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Costs Determination After Dismissal of Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicants' conduct warranted an order for costs given the operation of s 85A Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)" 'Whether applicants acted unreasonably in institution and prosecution of proceedings' 'Standing of applicants to bring the application']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants' conduct in instituting and prosecuting the proceedings was unreasonable, as the grounds of review lacked merit and no reasonable explanation was provided for participation. This caused the second respondent to incur costs, justifying an order for costs against the applicants under s 85A of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

Court Disposition

Applicants ordered to pay costs

Orders

  • ["The applicants pay the second respondent's costs of the proceedings, including reserved costs."]