Dranichnikov v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 94

Dranichnikov v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 94

There was no reason why costs should not follow the event, so the applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings; any impecuniosity of the applicant was a matter for the Minister when deciding whether to enforce the order.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 January 2001
Procedural Posture
Federal Court Proceeding / Costs Order
Outcome
The applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'costs Following the Event' 'impecuniosity and Enforcement of Costs Orders']
['civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'costs Following the Event' 'impecuniosity and Enforcement of Costs Orders']

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

Federal Court Proceeding / Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant should pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings." "Whether the applicant's impecuniosity should affect the making or enforcement of the costs order."]

Ratio Decidendi

There was no reason why costs should not follow the event, so the applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings; any impecuniosity of the applicant was a matter for the Minister when deciding whether to enforce the order.

Court Disposition

The applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings.

Orders

  • ["The applicant pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings."]