Trad v Jones (No. 3) (EOD) [2013] NSWADTAP 13

Trad v Jones (No. 3) (EOD) [2013] NSWADTAP 13

The Appeal Panel declined to deal with first instance costs because it apprehended it had no power to order them and considered it inappropriate to entertain that dispute. It awarded Mr Trad one half of his appeal costs because the appeal proceedings were unusually complex, raised intricate legal issues requiring experienced representation, Mr Trad substantially succeeded in the appeals brought by Mr Jones and Harbour Radio, and the case had unusual characteristics making it fair under section 88(1A) to depart from the usual position that each party bears its own costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Costs Application in an Appeal Concerning Proceedings Under the Anti Discrimination Act 1977 / Appeal Panel Internal; on the Papers
Outcome
Costs awarded in part to Mr Trad for the appeals; first instance costs not determined.
Legal Topics
['costs in Equal Opportunity Division Proceedings' 'costs on Appeal' 'power to Award First Instance Costs' 'fairness Discretion Under Section 88 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997' 'chilling Effect of Costs Orders in Human Rights Jurisdiction']
['administrative Law' 'anti Discrimination Law' 'costs'] ['costs in Equal Opportunity Division Proceedings' 'costs on Appeal' 'power to Award First Instance Costs' 'fairness Discretion Under Section 88 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997' 'chilling Effect of Costs Orders in Human Rights Jurisdiction']

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 Application in an Appeal Concerning Proceedings Under the Anti Discrimination Act 1977 / Appeal Panel Internal; on the Papers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Appeal Panel had power to order costs of the proceedings at first instance.' 'Whether it was fair to award costs of the appeals under section 88 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 and section 110 of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977.' 'Whether the nature, complexity and outcome of the appeals justified departing from the usual position that each party bears its own costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel declined to deal with first instance costs because it apprehended it had no power to order them and considered it inappropriate to entertain that dispute. It awarded Mr Trad one half of his appeal costs because the appeal proceedings were unusually complex, raised intricate legal issues requiring experienced representation, Mr Trad substantially succeeded in the appeals brought by Mr Jones and Harbour Radio, and the case had unusual characteristics making it fair under section 88(1A) to depart from the usual position that each party bears its own costs.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded in part to Mr Trad for the appeals; first instance costs not determined.

Orders

  • ["In each appeal Alan Jones and Harbour Radio Pty Limited pay one half of Mr Trad's costs of the appeal." 'In default of agreement between the parties as to the quantum of costs, this costs order be registered with the Supreme Court of New South Wales for assessment of the costs by the honourable Court.']