Cooper v Western Area Local Health Network (No 2) [2012] NSWADT 138

Cooper v Western Area Local Health Network (No 2) [2012] NSWADT 138

The Tribunal found that, although the applicant was successful against the second respondent, the circumstances did not reach the threshold of conduct warranting a costs order, and the proceedings were run fairly and economically by the second respondent; therefore, it was not fair to order costs under s 88 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997.

Parties
Applicant: Catherine Cooper; First Respondent: Western NSW Local Health Network; Second Respondent: Colin Locke
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Application for Costs / Post Substantive Decision, Costs Determination
Outcome
Application for costs dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs, Sexual Harassment, Fairness in Costs Orders
Administrative Law Anti Discrimination Law Costs Sexual Harassment Fairness in Costs Orders

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Catherine Cooper

Applicant

Western NSW Local Health Network

First Respondent

Colin Locke

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Costs / Post Substantive Decision, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it is fair to order the second respondent to pay the applicant's costs under s 88 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that, although the applicant was successful against the second respondent, the circumstances did not reach the threshold of conduct warranting a costs order, and the proceedings were run fairly and economically by the second respondent; therefore, it was not fair to order costs under s 88 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997.

Court Disposition

Application for costs dismissed

Orders

  • The application for costs by the applicant should be dismissed.