Commonwealth of Australia v Lyon [2004] FCAFC 92

Commonwealth of Australia v Lyon [2004] FCAFC 92

The ordinary rule applies and the second, fourth and eighth to twelfth respondents must pay the appellants' costs of the appeal, with undetermined issues of costs at first instance to be determined by the primary judge.

Parties
First Appellant: Commonwealth of Australia; Second Appellant: Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police; First Respondent: Paul Lyon; Second Respondent: Frank Patrick Barbaro; Third Respondent: Arthur Joseph Loveday; Fourth Respondent: Joseph Alexander Cassar; Fifth Respondent: Frank Velardi; Sixth Respondent: Peter Pangallo; Seventh Respondent: Robert Ibrahim; Eighth Respondent: Australian Broadcasting Corporation; Ninth Respondent: Seven Network Pty Ltd; Tenth Respondent: Nine Network Pty Ltd; Eleventh Respondent: John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd; Twelfth Respondent: News Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Post Appeal (costs Determination)
Outcome
Costs determined as specified: costs of appeal ordered against specified respondents; costs at first instance to be determined by primary judge; no order as to costs on notice of motion.
Legal Topics
Costs, Public Interest Immunity, Discontinuance, Jurisdiction
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Costs Public Interest Immunity Discontinuance Jurisdiction

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commonwealth of Australia

First Appellant

Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police

Second Appellant

Paul Lyon

First Respondent

Frank Patrick Barbaro

Second Respondent

Arthur Joseph Loveday

Third Respondent

Joseph Alexander Cassar

Fourth Respondent

Frank Velardi

Fifth Respondent

Peter Pangallo

Sixth Respondent

Robert Ibrahim

Seventh Respondent

Australian Broadcasting Corporation

Eighth Respondent

Seven Network Pty Ltd

Ninth Respondent

Nine Network Pty Ltd

Tenth Respondent

John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd

Eleventh Respondent

News Limited

Twelfth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Post Appeal (costs Determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 whether all issues of costs at first instance should be determined by the primary judge
  2. 2 whether usual rule should govern costs of the appeal
  3. 3 costs after successful appeal on jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

The ordinary rule applies and the second, fourth and eighth to twelfth respondents must pay the appellants' costs of the appeal, with undetermined issues of costs at first instance to be determined by the primary judge.

Court Disposition

Costs determined as specified: costs of appeal ordered against specified respondents; costs at first instance to be determined by primary judge; no order as to costs on notice of motion.

Orders

  • All undetermined issues as to the costs of this matter at first instance be determined by the primary judge.
  • There be no order as to the costs of the notice of motion dated 26 November 2003.