Frederico v New MacDonald's Farm Pty Limited and Others [2003] NSWIRComm 261

Frederico v New MacDonald's Farm Pty Limited and Others [2003] NSWIRComm 261

No order for costs should be made for either party because the order sought should have been dealt with by consent from the start, the applicant's solicitors should have sought the respondents' consent, and the motion and mention were unnecessary; even after filing, the respondents' indication of consent could have avoided the mention.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 August 2003
Procedural Posture
Application Under Section 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Judgment on Costs in Relation to a Notice of Motion Filed by the Applicant After Settlement at Conciliation
Outcome
No order as to costs was made in favour of either party in relation to the motion or the mention; each side was to bear its own costs.
Legal Topics
['notice of Motion for Costs' 'consent Orders' 'costs of Mention' 'section 106 Application' 'section 109 Conciliation']
['industrial Relations' 'costs'] ['notice of Motion for Costs' 'consent Orders' 'costs of Mention' 'section 106 Application' 'section 109 Conciliation']

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

Application Under Section 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Judgment on Costs in Relation to a Notice of Motion Filed by the Applicant After Settlement at Conciliation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should receive costs of the notice of motion after the respondents consented to the order sought.' 'Whether the respondents should receive costs of the mention because consent to the order had not been sought before the motion was filed.' 'Whether any costs order should be made where the motion and mention were unnecessary.']

Ratio Decidendi

No order for costs should be made for either party because the order sought should have been dealt with by consent from the start, the applicant's solicitors should have sought the respondents' consent, and the motion and mention were unnecessary; even after filing, the respondents' indication of consent could have avoided the mention.

Court Disposition

No order as to costs was made in favour of either party in relation to the motion or the mention; each side was to bear its own costs.

Orders

  • ['Each party is ordered to bear its own costs in relation to the motion.']