Director-General, Department of Community Services v. Druett [2003] NSWCA 351

Director-General, Department of Community Services v. Druett [2003] NSWCA 351

Leave to appeal was refused because the Appeal Panel had taken into account that the appeal had no foundation, had not relied on irrelevant considerations in a way warranting intervention, could draw conclusions about the costs burden, and had made a decision confined to the particular case rather than applying an erroneous general rule. Mr. Druett identified no reasonable basis for leave to cross-appeal or to appeal other decisions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 December 2003
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal and Leave to Cross Appeal Concerning Costs / Court of Appeal Summonses Decided on the Papers Pursuant to Pt.51 R.4 D
Outcome
Both summonses dismissed; each party to bear its own costs of both summonses.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'costs Discretion' 'special Circumstances' 'administrative Decisions Tribunal Appeal Panel']
['appeals' 'costs' 'administrative Review'] ['leave to Appeal' 'costs Discretion' 'special Circumstances' 'administrative Decisions Tribunal Appeal Panel']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal and Leave to Cross Appeal Concerning Costs / Court of Appeal Summonses Decided on the Papers Pursuant to Pt.51 R.4 D

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the Appeal Panel's dismissal of the Department's application for costs." 'Whether leave to cross-appeal or appeal should be granted to Mr. Druett.' 'Whether the Appeal Panel erred in its consideration of special circumstances, irrelevant considerations, the burden imposed on the Department, and its approach to costs in administrative review cases.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the Appeal Panel had taken into account that the appeal had no foundation, had not relied on irrelevant considerations in a way warranting intervention, could draw conclusions about the costs burden, and had made a decision confined to the particular case rather than applying an erroneous general rule. Mr. Druett identified no reasonable basis for leave to cross-appeal or to appeal other decisions.

Court Disposition

Both summonses dismissed; each party to bear its own costs of both summonses.

Orders

  • ['Both summonses dismissed.' 'Each party to bear its own costs of both summonses.']