Birdseye v Sheahan [2005] FCA 305

Birdseye v Sheahan [2005] FCA 305

Because the first respondent was successful in the proceeding, sought his trial costs, and the applicant did not object to that order, the Court ordered the applicant to pay the first respondent's costs of the trial; no costs order was made between the applicant and the Official Receiver.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Application for Costs / Post Judgment Costs Application After Trial Judgment and Dismissal of Appeal
Outcome
Costs application granted in favour of the first respondent; no order as to costs between the applicant and the second respondent.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'party and Party Costs' 'no Order as to Costs']
['civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'party and Party Costs' 'no Order as to Costs']

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

Application for Costs / Post Judgment Costs Application After Trial Judgment and Dismissal of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant should pay the first respondent's costs of the trial." 'Whether any costs order should be made between the applicant and the Official Receiver.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the first respondent was successful in the proceeding, sought his trial costs, and the applicant did not object to that order, the Court ordered the applicant to pay the first respondent's costs of the trial; no costs order was made between the applicant and the Official Receiver.

Court Disposition

Costs application granted in favour of the first respondent; no order as to costs between the applicant and the second respondent.

Orders

  • ['The applicant pay to the respondent John Sheahan his costs of the trial.' 'There be no order as to costs as between the applicant and the Official Receiver.']