Shafran v Repatriation Commission (No 2) [2020] FCA 1072

Shafran v Repatriation Commission (No 2) [2020] FCA 1072

Given the public interest component, the correction of imperfect understandings of relevant legislation, and the applicant's success, costs should follow the event from the date of the amended originating application, but not prior; public interest did not justify each party bearing their own costs or a percentage reduction.

Parties
Applicant: Geoffrey Shafran; First Respondent: Repatriation Commission; Second Respondent: Veterans' Review Board
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Costs Application After Judicial Review / Post Judgment Costs Ruling
Outcome
Costs awarded in favour of the applicant, limited to costs on and from the filing of the amended originating application
Legal Topics
Costs, Judicial Review, Veterans' Entitlements, Public Interest
Administrative Law Costs Judicial Review Veterans' Entitlements Public 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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Geoffrey Shafran

Applicant

Repatriation Commission

First Respondent

Veterans' Review Board

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Costs Application After Judicial Review / Post Judgment Costs Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to costs from the first respondent
  2. 2 Whether costs should be fixed or awarded on a percentage basis
  3. 3 Whether public interest considerations justify departure from the usual costs rule

Ratio Decidendi

Given the public interest component, the correction of imperfect understandings of relevant legislation, and the applicant's success, costs should follow the event from the date of the amended originating application, but not prior; public interest did not justify each party bearing their own costs or a percentage reduction.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded in favour of the applicant, limited to costs on and from the filing of the amended originating application

Orders

  • The first respondent pay the applicant's costs, including reserved costs, if any, of and incidental to the proceeding on and from the filing on 30 August 2019 of the amended originating application (including those relating to the preparation, filing and service of that amended application), including the costs of...
  • Save as aforesaid and without prejudice to the costs order made on 29 July 2019, there be no order as to costs.