Gumurdul v Northern Land Council [2000] FCA 1345

Gumurdul v Northern Land Council [2000] FCA 1345

The applicants sought leave to discontinue because of what was in effect an offer made by the respondents before the proceeding was instituted, and the respondents had not acted unreasonably in their stance. In those circumstances there was no reason not to give effect to the policy of the Federal Court Rules that the discontinuing applicants should pay the respondents' costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 September 2000
Procedural Posture
Federal Court Proceeding Concerning Leave to Discontinue and Costs / Reasons for Costs Order After Leave to Discontinue
Outcome
Leave to discontinue was granted and the applicants were ordered to pay the respondents' costs.
Legal Topics
['discontinuance' 'costs' 'notice to Quit' 'extension of Time for Application for Order of Review' 'federal Court Rules']
['civil Procedure' 'administrative Law' 'aboriginal Land Rights'] ['discontinuance' 'costs' 'notice to Quit' 'extension of Time for Application for Order of Review' 'federal Court Rules']

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

Federal Court Proceeding Concerning Leave to Discontinue and Costs / Reasons for Costs Order After Leave to Discontinue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicants should pay the respondents' costs of and incidental to the discontinued proceeding." 'Whether the policy reflected in O 22 r 3 of the Federal Court Rules should be applied where discontinuance required leave of the Court.' 'Whether the respondents acted unreasonably so as to justify denying them costs or part of their costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants sought leave to discontinue because of what was in effect an offer made by the respondents before the proceeding was instituted, and the respondents had not acted unreasonably in their stance. In those circumstances there was no reason not to give effect to the policy of the Federal Court Rules that the discontinuing applicants should pay the respondents' costs.

Court Disposition

Leave to discontinue was granted and the applicants were ordered to pay the respondents' costs.

Orders

  • ["The applicants pay the respondents' costs of and incidental to the proceeding, including reserved costs and the costs of the notice of motion dated 11 August 2000."]