Prasad & anor -v- Fairfield City Council [2002] NSWADT 69

Prasad & anor -v- Fairfield City Council [2002] NSWADT 69

Special circumstances existed as regards the hearings of 29 May, 9 June, and 7 July, warranting a costs order in favour of the Applicants; this was due to the Respondent’s conduct causing wasted expense and unnecessary argument.

Parties
Applicant: Daniel Prasad; Applicant: Stephen Walker; Respondent: Fairfield City Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 May 2002
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Decision on Costs Following Hearings and Appeal Direction
Outcome
Costs order in favour of Applicants for specified hearings.
Legal Topics
Costs in Tribunal Proceedings, Special Circumstances for Costs Orders
Administrative Law Retail Leases Costs in Tribunal Proceedings Special Circumstances for 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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Prasad

Applicant

Stephen Walker

Applicant

Fairfield City Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Costs Application / Decision on Costs Following Hearings and Appeal Direction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether special circumstances exist warranting an award of costs under section 88 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997

Ratio Decidendi

Special circumstances existed as regards the hearings of 29 May, 9 June, and 7 July, warranting a costs order in favour of the Applicants; this was due to the Respondent’s conduct causing wasted expense and unnecessary argument.

Court Disposition

Costs order in favour of Applicants for specified hearings.

Orders

  • The Respondent is to pay Applicant's costs of hearings on 29 May 2000, 9 June 2000, and 7 July 2000 and all work reasonably necessary to prepare there for; then if the amount cannot be agreed, as assessed pursuant to the Legal Profession Act.