Windsor v National Mutual Life Association of Australia Limited [1992] FCA 1101

Windsor v National Mutual Life Association of Australia Limited [1992] FCA 1101

There was no reason why costs of the cross-appeal should not follow the event. For the appeal, although the first instance public interest reasoning had force, it was not appropriate to apply that reasoning again at the appellate stage; the appellant prosecuted the appeal at his own risk as to costs and the Court was not persuaded to depart from the ordinary rule that an unsuccessful appellant bears the costs of a dismissed appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 October 1992
Procedural Posture
Appeal and Cross Appeal / Reasons for Judgment on Reserved Costs After Appeal and Cross Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Costs orders made after dismissal of appeal and cross-appeal.
Legal Topics
['costs of Appeal' 'costs of Cross Appeal' 'costs Follow the Event' 'reserved Costs' 'public Interest Considerations in Costs']
['civil Procedure' 'costs' 'appellate Procedure'] ['costs of Appeal' 'costs of Cross Appeal' 'costs Follow the Event' 'reserved Costs' 'public Interest Considerations in Costs']

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

Appeal and Cross Appeal / Reasons for Judgment on Reserved Costs After Appeal and Cross Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there should be no order as to costs of the appeal.' 'Whether costs of the cross-appeal should follow the event after the cross-appeal was abandoned.']

Ratio Decidendi

There was no reason why costs of the cross-appeal should not follow the event. For the appeal, although the first instance public interest reasoning had force, it was not appropriate to apply that reasoning again at the appellate stage; the appellant prosecuted the appeal at his own risk as to costs and the Court was not persuaded to depart from the ordinary rule that an unsuccessful appellant bears the costs of a dismissed appeal.

Court Disposition

Costs orders made after dismissal of appeal and cross-appeal.

Orders

  • ["The appellant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal." "The cross-appellant pay the cross-respondent's costs of the cross-appeal."]