Morrison v Chevalley (No 2) [2010] NSWIRComm 167

Morrison v Chevalley (No 2) [2010] NSWIRComm 167

Although the prosecutor was successful on the referred questions and was prima facie entitled to costs, there was a public interest consideration because Kirk left for later determination the implications for charges against directors and managers under s 26 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000. Balancing that consideration against the usual rule that costs follow the event, the defendants were ordered to pay 50 per cent of the prosecutor's costs of the proceedings, but neither defendant was liable for costs connected with the constitutional issue.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Costs Determination in Occupational Health and Safety Prosecutions Following a Full Bench Reference of Questions of Law / After Morrison V Chevalley [2010] Nswircomm 116 Answered Seven Referred Questions of Law; Costs Determined on Written Submissions
Outcome
Defendants ordered to pay 50 per cent of the prosecutor's costs, with no liability for costs connected with the constitutional issue.
Legal Topics
['costs Follow the Event' 'special Circumstances' 'public Interest Considerations in Costs' 'reference of Questions of Law' 'prosecution of Directors and Managers Under S 26 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000' 'constitutionality of S 26 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000']
['occupational Health and Safety' 'costs' 'industrial Relations' 'constitutional Law'] ['costs Follow the Event' 'special Circumstances' 'public Interest Considerations in Costs' 'reference of Questions of Law' 'prosecution of Directors and Managers Under S 26 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000' 'constitutionality of S 26 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000']

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

Costs Determination in Occupational Health and Safety Prosecutions Following a Full Bench Reference of Questions of Law / After Morrison V Chevalley [2010] Nswircomm 116 Answered Seven Referred Questions of Law; Costs Determined on Written Submissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the prosecutor should have his costs of the Reference or whether each party should bear its own costs' 'Whether special circumstances or public interest considerations justified departure from the usual rule that costs follow the event' 'Whether either defendant should be liable for costs connected with the constitutional issue concerning s 26 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the prosecutor was successful on the referred questions and was prima facie entitled to costs, there was a public interest consideration because Kirk left for later determination the implications for charges against directors and managers under s 26 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000. Balancing that consideration against the usual rule that costs follow the event, the defendants were ordered to pay 50 per cent of the prosecutor's costs of the proceedings, but neither defendant was liable for costs connected with the constitutional issue.

Court Disposition

Defendants ordered to pay 50 per cent of the prosecutor's costs, with no liability for costs connected with the constitutional issue.

Orders

  • ["Subject to order (2), the defendants shall pay 50 per cent of the prosecutor's costs of the proceedings as agreed or assessed." 'Neither Mr Chevalley nor Mr Grugeon shall be liable to pay any costs in connection with the constitutional issue.']