Australian Trade Commission v Disktravel [2000] FCA 62

Australian Trade Commission v Disktravel [2000] FCA 62

The appellant was entirely successful in the appeal, and none of the issues were sufficiently distinct and severable to warrant an apportionment of costs. The complexity and overlap of issues did not justify departing from the principle that costs follow the event.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 February 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Question of Costs After Appeal Determination
Outcome
Costs order in favour of appellant; no apportionment.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'apportionment of Costs' 'exercise of Discretion in Costs']
['civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'apportionment of Costs' 'exercise of Discretion in Costs']

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

Appeal / Judgment on Question of Costs After Appeal Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether costs should be apportioned where the appellant succeeded on some but not all issues' 'Principles for discretion in awarding costs']

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant was entirely successful in the appeal, and none of the issues were sufficiently distinct and severable to warrant an apportionment of costs. The complexity and overlap of issues did not justify departing from the principle that costs follow the event.

Court Disposition

Costs order in favour of appellant; no apportionment.

Orders

  • ["The respondents to pay the appellant's costs of the proceedings before the Learned Primary Judge." 'The orders made on 22 October 1999 are not otherwise varied.']