Fair Work Ombudsman v Skilled Offshore (Australia) Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] FCA 1509

Fair Work Ombudsman v Skilled Offshore (Australia) Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] FCA 1509

The MUA's conduct in defending the liability proceeding, making a no case submission, not calling Mr Cain, and not making further admissions was not unreasonable within s 570 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The FWO's case depended on witness credibility and contained inconsistencies that the MUA was entitled to test, and this was not an exceptional case for costs. Interest should be paid on the compensation, but because the FWO delayed in prosecuting the compensation and interest claims, justice required interest at the pre-judgment interest rate only from 1 August 2009 to 18 September 2013 and thereafter to 25 March 2015 at the rates obtainable by the MUA from its bankers on equivalent...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 December 2015
Procedural Posture
Fair Work Act Costs and Pre Judgment Interest Application Following Liability, Penalty and Compensation Judgments / Post Judgment Application for Costs and Interest
Outcome
The application for costs was refused. Interest was allowed in part according to the periods and rates stated in the reasons, with liberty to apply as to quantum.
Legal Topics
['fair Work Act Costs Limitation' 'unreasonable Act or Omission Causing Costs' 'pre Judgment Interest on Compensation' 'delay in Seeking Compensation and Interest']
['employment and Industrial Law' 'costs' 'practice and Procedure'] ['fair Work Act Costs Limitation' 'unreasonable Act or Omission Causing Costs' 'pre Judgment Interest on Compensation' 'delay in Seeking Compensation and Interest']

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

Fair Work Act Costs and Pre Judgment Interest Application Following Liability, Penalty and Compensation Judgments / Post Judgment Application for Costs and Interest

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the MUA should pay the FWO's costs of the liability proceeding under s 570 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) on the basis of unreasonable acts or omissions." 'Whether pre-judgment interest should be awarded on compensation payable to Mr Bruce Love and Mrs Lynne Love, and for what period and at what rate.' 'Whether delay by the FWO in seeking compensation and interest justified limiting the period or rate for pre-judgment interest.']

Ratio Decidendi

The MUA's conduct in defending the liability proceeding, making a no case submission, not calling Mr Cain, and not making further admissions was not unreasonable within s 570 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The FWO's case depended on witness credibility and contained inconsistencies that the MUA was entitled to test, and this was not an exceptional case for costs. Interest should be paid on the compensation, but because the FWO delayed in prosecuting the compensation and interest claims, justice required interest at the pre-judgment interest rate only from 1 August 2009 to 18 September 2013 and thereafter to 25 March 2015 at the rates obtainable by the MUA from its bankers on equivalent...

Court Disposition

The application for costs was refused. Interest was allowed in part according to the periods and rates stated in the reasons, with liberty to apply as to quantum.

Orders

  • ['The parties bring in a minute of orders by 4.00 pm WST on 1 February 2016 to reflect these reasons including as to final interest orders in the event those can be agreed.' 'There be liberty to apply in relation to the quantum of interest in the event that this cannot be agreed.']