Manchester v Camerons Motorist Services Pty Ltd & Anor; Bromfield v Camerons Motorist Services Pty Ltd & Anor; Cargill v Camerons Motorist Services Pty Ltd & Anor [2022] NSWDC 592

Manchester v Camerons Motorist Services Pty Ltd & Anor; Bromfield v Camerons Motorist Services Pty Ltd & Anor; Cargill v Camerons Motorist Services Pty Ltd & Anor [2022] NSWDC 592

The Court was not persuaded that the plaintiffs' conduct in seeking amendment of pleadings rose to the high and exceptional standard of unreasonableness necessary under s 570(2) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) to justify an order for costs, nor that discretion should be exercised to order costs in the procedural interlocutory context, having regard to the policy of access to justice and absence of prejudice or unreasonable conduct found.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Costs Application Following Application to Amend Pleadings
Outcome
No order as to costs; plaintiffs' applications to amend statement of claim—no costs order made.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'unpaid Wages' 'fair Work Act' 'amendment of Pleadings' 'access to Justice']
['employment Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'unpaid Wages' 'fair Work Act' 'amendment of Pleadings' 'access to Justice']

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

Civil / Interlocutory Costs Application Following Application to Amend Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether unreasonable conduct by the plaintiffs caused the defendant to incur costs for the amendment application under s 570(2) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)' 'Whether the Court should exercise discretion to order costs in an interlocutory procedural application']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was not persuaded that the plaintiffs' conduct in seeking amendment of pleadings rose to the high and exceptional standard of unreasonableness necessary under s 570(2) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) to justify an order for costs, nor that discretion should be exercised to order costs in the procedural interlocutory context, having regard to the policy of access to justice and absence of prejudice or unreasonable conduct found.

Court Disposition

No order as to costs; plaintiffs' applications to amend statement of claim—no costs order made.

Orders

  • ["In each of the proceedings, there is no order as to the costs of the plaintiff's application to amend his statement of claim."]