Kitchen v Director of Professional Services Review (No 4) [2022] FCA 780

Kitchen v Director of Professional Services Review (No 4) [2022] FCA 780

The first respondent did not conduct itself improperly or unreasonably to warrant indemnity costs; standard party-party costs are appropriate, and the first respondent acted properly in its regulatory capacity.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Costs Application Following Substantive Judgment
Outcome
Application for indemnity costs dismissed. Standard party-party costs awarded.
Legal Topics
['indemnity Costs' 'regulatory Proceedings' 'judicial Review' 'party Party Costs']
['administrative Law'] ['indemnity Costs' 'regulatory Proceedings' 'judicial Review' 'party Party Costs']

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

Judicial Review / Costs Application Following Substantive Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether costs should be awarded on an indemnity basis against the first respondent' 'Extent of costs payable by the first respondent' 'Conduct of the first respondent justifying indemnity costs']

Ratio Decidendi

The first respondent did not conduct itself improperly or unreasonably to warrant indemnity costs; standard party-party costs are appropriate, and the first respondent acted properly in its regulatory capacity.

Court Disposition

Application for indemnity costs dismissed. Standard party-party costs awarded.

Orders

  • ["The first respondent pay that part of the applicant's costs on a party-party basis incurred in respect of his proceedings against the first and second respondents from commencement of the Originating Application filed on 13 November 2019, such costs to be taxed if not otherwise agreed." "The applicant pay the...