Foster v Que Noy (No 2) [2008] FCAFC 137

Foster v Que Noy (No 2) [2008] FCAFC 137

Because s 66B applications are within the Court's exclusive jurisdiction under s 81 and s 85A applies to appeals from such proceedings, the starting point was that each party should bear their own costs. Although aspects of the appellant's case had obvious difficulties and the respondents were successful, those circumstances did not warrant departing from that starting point.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Costs Decision on Appeals in Native Title Proceedings / After Dismissal of Appeals From Orders Replacing an Authorised Applicant Under S 66 B of the Native Title Act 1993 (cth)
Outcome
No order as to costs of the appeal.
Legal Topics
['replacement of Authorised Applicant' 'exclusive Jurisdiction' 'costs in Native Title Proceedings' 'costs on Appeal']
['native Title' 'civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['replacement of Authorised Applicant' 'exclusive Jurisdiction' 'costs in Native Title Proceedings' 'costs on Appeal']

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

Costs Decision on Appeals in Native Title Proceedings / After Dismissal of Appeals From Orders Replacing an Authorised Applicant Under S 66 B of the Native Title Act 1993 (cth)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an application under s 66B of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) to replace an applicant is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal Court for the purposes of s 81.' 'Whether s 85A of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) applies to appeals from proceedings within s 81.' 'Whether a costs order should be made in favour of the successful respondents.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because s 66B applications are within the Court's exclusive jurisdiction under s 81 and s 85A applies to appeals from such proceedings, the starting point was that each party should bear their own costs. Although aspects of the appellant's case had obvious difficulties and the respondents were successful, those circumstances did not warrant departing from that starting point.

Court Disposition

No order as to costs of the appeal.

Orders

  • ['There be no order as to the costs of the appeal.']