NEW SOUTH WALES CRIME COMMISSION v MACRIS [2002] NSWSC 307

NEW SOUTH WALES CRIME COMMISSION v MACRIS [2002] NSWSC 307

Because the Crime Commission withdrew its stay application in circumstances showing that the respondent should not have been brought to court on the application, the Court ordered that the respondent's costs for 25 March 2002 and 27 March 2002 be paid on an indemnity basis, including senior and junior counsel.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 March 2002
Procedural Posture
Application for a Stay / Application Withdrawn; Costs Determined
Outcome
Application for a stay withdrawn; indemnity costs ordered against the New South Wales Crime Commission for 25 and 27 March 2002.
Legal Topics
['stay of Judgment' 'indemnity Costs' 'costs of Senior and Junior Counsel']

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Application for a Stay / Application Withdrawn; Costs Determined

  1. 1 ['Whether the stay should be granted subject to a condition requiring payment of funds for legal expenses.' 'Whether the respondent should receive indemnity costs after the applicant withdrew the stay application.' 'Whether costs should include senior and junior counsel for 25 and 27 March 2002.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the Crime Commission withdrew its stay application in circumstances showing that the respondent should not have been brought to court on the application, the Court ordered that the respondent's costs for 25 March 2002 and 27 March 2002 be paid on an indemnity basis, including senior and junior counsel.

Court Disposition

Application for a stay withdrawn; indemnity costs ordered against the New South Wales Crime Commission for 25 and 27 March 2002.

Orders

  • ['The costs for 25 March 2002 and 27 March 2002 are to be paid on an indemnity basis.' 'The matter was indicated to be a proper case for senior and junior counsel.']