Willis, Francis Kevin v Battese, Noel [1979] FCA 56

Willis, Francis Kevin v Battese, Noel [1979] FCA 56

The respondent was not entitled to costs because the Court was not satisfied that the claimant commenced the proceedings vexatiously or without reasonable cause, particularly where the rule to show cause had been granted by a judge after consideration of the material and argument. The rule nisi was therefore discharged without an order that the claimant pay the respondent's costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 May 1979
Procedural Posture
Application Under S.141 of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904 for Directions for Compliance With Union Rules / Return of Rule Nisi to Show Cause; Claimant Sought Discharge and Respondent Sought Costs
Outcome
Rule nisi discharged; respondent's application for costs rejected.
Legal Topics
['rule Nisi' 'compliance With Union Rules' 'costs in Proceedings Under the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904' 'proceedings Instituted Vexatiously or Without Reasonable Cause']
['industrial Law' 'costs' 'trade Unions'] ['rule Nisi' 'compliance With Union Rules' 'costs in Proceedings Under the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904' 'proceedings Instituted Vexatiously or Without Reasonable Cause']

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 Under S.141 of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904 for Directions for Compliance With Union Rules / Return of Rule Nisi to Show Cause; Claimant Sought Discharge and Respondent Sought Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the rule nisi dated 23 May 1979 should be discharged.' "Whether the claimant should be ordered to pay the respondent's costs on the basis that the proceeding was instituted vexatiously or without reasonable cause within s.197A of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904."]

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent was not entitled to costs because the Court was not satisfied that the claimant commenced the proceedings vexatiously or without reasonable cause, particularly where the rule to show cause had been granted by a judge after consideration of the material and argument. The rule nisi was therefore discharged without an order that the claimant pay the respondent's costs.

Court Disposition

Rule nisi discharged; respondent's application for costs rejected.

Orders

  • ['The rule nisi dated 23 May 1979 be discharged.']