EEU20 v Meat Industry Employees' Superannuation Fund Pty Ltd (Trustee) (No 2) [2020] FCA 1536

EEU20 v Meat Industry Employees' Superannuation Fund Pty Ltd (Trustee) (No 2) [2020] FCA 1536

Although the applicants succeeded in setting aside the Tribunal's decision, both respondents filed submitting notices and did not actively contest the proceeding. The trustee did not cause the Tribunal to err in law and did not add to the applicants' costs. The Tribunal followed the usual position of not actively defending its decision, and there was no misconduct, improper purpose, serious misconduct, corruption, perversity, or other exceptional circumstance justifying costs against it. The usual practice that costs follow the event applies principally to actively contested proceedings and did not warrant departure from each party bearing its own costs here.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Costs Application Following Setting Aside and Remittal of a Superannuation Complaints Tribunal Decision / Determined on the Papers After Written Submissions
Outcome
Costs application dismissed; no order for costs against either respondent.
Legal Topics
['submitting Notices' 'costs Against Tribunal' 'costs Against Trustee' 'judicial Review of Tribunal Decision' 'procedural Fairness']
['administrative Law' 'costs' 'superannuation'] ['submitting Notices' 'costs Against Tribunal' 'costs Against Trustee' 'judicial Review of Tribunal Decision' 'procedural Fairness']

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

Costs Application Following Setting Aside and Remittal of a Superannuation Complaints Tribunal Decision / Determined on the Papers After Written Submissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the successful applicants should receive costs against the trustee where the trustee filed a submitting notice and did not actively participate.' 'Whether the successful applicants should receive costs against the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal where the Tribunal filed a submitting notice and did not actively defend its decision.' 'The purpose and costs consequences of submitting notices under r 12.01 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth).']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the applicants succeeded in setting aside the Tribunal's decision, both respondents filed submitting notices and did not actively contest the proceeding. The trustee did not cause the Tribunal to err in law and did not add to the applicants' costs. The Tribunal followed the usual position of not actively defending its decision, and there was no misconduct, improper purpose, serious misconduct, corruption, perversity, or other exceptional circumstance justifying costs against it. The usual practice that costs follow the event applies principally to actively contested proceedings and did not warrant departure from each party bearing its own costs here.

Court Disposition

Costs application dismissed; no order for costs against either respondent.

Orders

  • ['The parties bear their own legal costs of the proceeding.']