Aussie Airlines Pty Ltd v Australian Airlines Ltd & Ors Qantas Airlines Ltd v Aussie Airlines Pty Ltd [1997] FCA 502
'The event' for the purposes of Order 62 rule 15 of the Federal Court Rules is the final outcome of the principal proceeding, not interlocutory determinations such as separate question motions; thus, reserved costs from such motions do not follow interlocutory success but await final disposition absent specific court order. Further, indemnity or solicitor/own client costs were unwarranted without evidence of hopelessness or improper purpose in the injunction proceedings.
- Parties
- Applicant / Cross Respondent: Aussie Airlines Pty Ltd; First Respondent / First Cross Claimant: Australian Airlines Limited; Second Respondent / Second Cross Claimant: Qantas Airlines Limited; Third Respondent: Federal Airports Corporation
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 05 June 1997
- Procedural Posture
- Motion in Ongoing Federal Court Proceeding / Interlocutory Costs Determination, Pre Final Determination of Principal Proceeding
- Outcome
- Applicant's motion dismissed; respondents' costs of motion ordered; reserved costs not awarded at this stage; applicant's request for indemnity costs refused; application for release of security money refused.
- Legal Topics
- Costs, Interlocutory Applications, Order 62 Rule 15 of the Federal Court Rules, Security for Costs, Discovery, Separate Questions, Indemnity Costs
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Aussie Airlines Pty Ltd
Applicant / Cross Respondent
Australian Airlines Limited
First Respondent / First Cross Claimant
Qantas Airlines Limited
Second Respondent / Second Cross Claimant
Federal Airports Corporation
Third Respondent
Procedural Posture
Motion in Ongoing Federal Court Proceeding / Interlocutory Costs Determination, Pre Final Determination of Principal Proceeding
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether reserved costs of a motion for determination of separate issues should follow the 'event' prior to trial
- 2 Proper interpretation of 'the event' under Order 62 rule 15 of the Federal Court Rules
- 3 Whether indemnity or solicitor/own client costs should be awarded for an unsuccessfully maintained injunction application
Ratio Decidendi
'The event' for the purposes of Order 62 rule 15 of the Federal Court Rules is the final outcome of the principal proceeding, not interlocutory determinations such as separate question motions; thus, reserved costs from such motions do not follow interlocutory success but await final disposition absent specific court order. Further, indemnity or solicitor/own client costs were unwarranted without evidence of hopelessness or improper purpose in the injunction proceedings.
Court Disposition
Applicant's motion dismissed; respondents' costs of motion ordered; reserved costs not awarded at this stage; applicant's request for indemnity costs refused; application for release of security money refused.
Orders
- The applicant pay the first and second respondents' taxed costs of the motion notice of which is dated 26 February 1997.
- The applicant's motion notice of which is dated 26 May 1997 be dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment