Donnelly v Maxwell-Smith (No 2) [2011] FCAFC 1

Donnelly v Maxwell-Smith (No 2) [2011] FCAFC 1

It is appropriate to amend Order 3 to accurately record that the applicant did not oppose, rather than consent to, the respondents' costs for travelling to and attending the hearing in Sydney.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Post Judgment Clarification/order Amendment
Outcome
Order 3 amended to clarify costs position and orders made accordingly.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'amendment of Orders' 'federal Court Rules']
['civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'amendment of Orders' 'federal Court Rules']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Post Judgment Clarification/order Amendment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["whether Order 3 made on 16 December 2010 should be amended to correct an error regarding the appellant's consent to payment of respondents' costs"]

Ratio Decidendi

It is appropriate to amend Order 3 to accurately record that the applicant did not oppose, rather than consent to, the respondents' costs for travelling to and attending the hearing in Sydney.

Court Disposition

Order 3 amended to clarify costs position and orders made accordingly.

Orders

  • ["Order 3 made on 16 December 2010 be amended to read: 'The applicant pay the respondents' costs of the appeal and application for leave to appeal including, there being no opposition by the applicant, their costs of travelling to and attending at the hearing in Sydney.'"]