Nield v Mathieson (No 2) [2014] FCAFC 86

Nield v Mathieson (No 2) [2014] FCAFC 86

The appeal plainly related to a matter arising under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) because the successful cause of action depended on provisions of that Act compelling compliance with awards and prescribing remedies for non-compliance; the other causes of action were within pendent jurisdiction and part of a single justiciable controversy. Since none of the s 570(2) exceptions arose, s 570(1) applied and there could be no order as to costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal Costs Application Under the Fair Work Act 2009 (cth) / After Dismissal of Appeal; Costs Determined on Written Submissions
Outcome
No order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['fair Work Act 2009 (cth) S 570' 'costs in Fair Work Proceedings' 'pendent Jurisdiction' 'single Justiciable Controversy']
['employment Law' 'costs' 'appellate Procedure'] ['fair Work Act 2009 (cth) S 570' 'costs in Fair Work Proceedings' 'pendent Jurisdiction' 'single Justiciable Controversy']

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 Costs Application Under the Fair Work Act 2009 (cth) / After Dismissal of Appeal; Costs Determined on Written Submissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether s 570(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) precluded the Court from making an order for costs on the appeal.' 'Whether the presence of alternative causes of action and claims in pendent jurisdiction affected the application of s 570(1) to the appeal.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal plainly related to a matter arising under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) because the successful cause of action depended on provisions of that Act compelling compliance with awards and prescribing remedies for non-compliance; the other causes of action were within pendent jurisdiction and part of a single justiciable controversy. Since none of the s 570(2) exceptions arose, s 570(1) applied and there could be no order as to costs.

Court Disposition

No order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['There be no order as to costs.']