Boney v Attorney General of New South Wales (No 2) [2018] FCA 1241

Boney v Attorney General of New South Wales (No 2) [2018] FCA 1241

Because s 85A of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) applied and neither party had acted unreasonably, each party should bear its own costs of the interlocutory application; however, because the amendments were an indulgence sought by and granted to the applicant, the applicant should pay the Current Applicant's costs, if any, thrown away by reason of the amendments.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Native Title Proceeding Concerning Costs of an Interlocutory Application / Costs Determined on the Papers After the Interlocutory Application Was Dismissed and Amendments Were Allowed
Outcome
Each party was ordered to bear its own costs of the interlocutory application, but the applicant was ordered to pay the Current Applicant's costs, if any, thrown away by reason of the amendments.
Legal Topics
['costs of Interlocutory Application' 'federal Court Costs Discretion' 'native Title Costs' 'amendments' 'costs Thrown Away' 'leave to Appeal']
['native Title' 'civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['costs of Interlocutory Application' 'federal Court Costs Discretion' 'native Title Costs' 'amendments' 'costs Thrown Away' 'leave to Appeal']

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

Native Title Proceeding Concerning Costs of an Interlocutory Application / Costs Determined on the Papers After the Interlocutory Application Was Dismissed and Amendments Were Allowed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What costs order should be made after dismissal of the interlocutory application.' 'Whether, in light of s 85A of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), each party should bear its own costs of the interlocutory application.' 'Whether the applicant should pay the costs thrown away by reason of amendments to the application for leave to appeal and draft notice of appeal.' 'Whether any costs concerning futility and standing arguments should be reserved to the Full Court.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because s 85A of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) applied and neither party had acted unreasonably, each party should bear its own costs of the interlocutory application; however, because the amendments were an indulgence sought by and granted to the applicant, the applicant should pay the Current Applicant's costs, if any, thrown away by reason of the amendments.

Court Disposition

Each party was ordered to bear its own costs of the interlocutory application, but the applicant was ordered to pay the Current Applicant's costs, if any, thrown away by reason of the amendments.

Orders

  • ['Each party bear their own costs of the interlocutory application.' 'The applicant pay the costs of the Current Applicant, if any, thrown away by reason of the amendments.']