Australian Workers Union v Leighton Contractors Pty Limited (No 2) [2013] FCAFC 23
Although the proceedings did not enjoy reasonable prospects of success when instituted (so jurisdiction to award costs existed), the discretionary power to do so was not exercised due to the case's significance and the parties' joint submission that it raised important, novel issues for interpretation by the Full Court.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 01 March 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Costs (post Judicial Review) / Costs Hearing Following Dismissal of Judicial Review Application
- Outcome
- Costs application dismissed; no order as to costs against applicant.
- Legal Topics
- ['costs' 'judicial Review' 'enterprise Agreements']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application for Costs (post Judicial Review) / Costs Hearing Following Dismissal of Judicial Review Application
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the applicant instituted proceedings without reasonable cause under s 570 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)' 'Whether costs should be awarded against the applicant given the circumstances under s 570']
Ratio Decidendi
Although the proceedings did not enjoy reasonable prospects of success when instituted (so jurisdiction to award costs existed), the discretionary power to do so was not exercised due to the case's significance and the parties' joint submission that it raised important, novel issues for interpretation by the Full Court.
Court Disposition
Costs application dismissed; no order as to costs against applicant.
Orders
- ['The application for costs brought by the third, fourth and fifth respondents be dismissed.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment