Hogbin v Leviathan Maintenance Services [2002] NSWIRComm 37

Hogbin v Leviathan Maintenance Services [2002] NSWIRComm 37

Neither party acted unreasonably in settlement negotiations; the uncertainty and gap in evidence prevent a finding of unreasonableness as required by s 181(2)(c) of the Industrial Relations Act 1996, and therefore the application for costs is refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 March 2002
Procedural Posture
Application for Costs Following Unfair Dismissal Proceedings / Decision on Costs
Outcome
application for costs refused
Legal Topics
['costs' 'unfair Dismissal' 'settlement Negotiations']
['industrial Relations'] ['costs' 'unfair Dismissal' 'settlement Negotiations']

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 Costs Following Unfair Dismissal Proceedings / Decision on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether either party unreasonably failed to agree to settlement within the meaning of s 181(2)(c) Industrial Relations Act 1996']

Ratio Decidendi

Neither party acted unreasonably in settlement negotiations; the uncertainty and gap in evidence prevent a finding of unreasonableness as required by s 181(2)(c) of the Industrial Relations Act 1996, and therefore the application for costs is refused.

Court Disposition

application for costs refused

Orders

  • ['The application for an order of costs pursuant to s 181 (c) of the Act is refused.']