Gianna Bagnara v Casino Canberra [1995] IRCA 328

The lack of diligence by the respondent's solicitors in ascertaining witnesses' availability caused wasted proceedings, justifying a costs order against them though not against the respondent.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 06 July 1995
Procedural Posture: Notice of Motion to Vacate Hearing Date / Costs Application After Vacation of Hearing Date
Outcome: Hearing date vacated; costs awarded against respondent's solicitors.
Legal Topics: ['costs' "solicitors' Negligence" 'vacation of Hearing Date']

['industrial Law'] ['costs' "solicitors' Negligence" 'vacation of Hearing Date']

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

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion to Vacate Hearing Date / Costs Application After Vacation of Hearing Date

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether costs should be awarded against solicitors due to lack of diligence resulting in a notice of motion to vacate hearing date' 'Whether costs can be awarded against respondent under s 347 of the Industrial Relations Act 1988']

Ratio Decidendi

The lack of diligence by the respondent's solicitors in ascertaining witnesses' availability caused wasted proceedings, justifying a costs order against them though not against the respondent.

Court Disposition

Hearing date vacated; costs awarded against respondent's solicitors.

Orders

['The hearing date of 12 July is vacated.' "Respondent's solicitors, Allen Allen and Hemsley, to pay the applicant's costs in the sum of $380.00."]