Lloyd v Veterinary Surgeons Investigating Committee (Discriplinary Order: Inquiries 1 ('Chisel'), 2 ('Gypsy') and 3 ('Remus')) (No 2) (GD) [2005] NSWADTAP 15

Lloyd v Veterinary Surgeons Investigating Committee (Discriplinary Order: Inquiries 1 ('Chisel'), 2 ('Gypsy') and 3 ('Remus')) (No 2) (GD) [2005] NSWADTAP 15

The Committee's late costs application was accepted because the administrative error was not serious and caused no prejudice. For the purposes of the application, the Panel proceeded on the basis that s 88(1) of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 applied and that special circumstances were required. Dr...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Appeal Concerning Veterinary Disciplinary Orders; Application for Costs / Appeal Dismissed; Costs Application Determined on the Papers
Outcome
Costs application granted in part.
Legal Topics
['veterinary Surgeons' 'disciplinary Orders' 'appeal on Question of Law' 'special Circumstances for Costs' 'no Real Prospect of Success' 'late Application for Costs']
['administrative Law' 'professional Discipline' 'costs'] ['veterinary Surgeons' 'disciplinary Orders' 'appeal on Question of Law' 'special Circumstances for Costs' 'no Real Prospect of Success' 'late Application for Costs']

Source-derived case record

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

Appeal Concerning Veterinary Disciplinary Orders; Application for Costs / Appeal Dismissed; Costs Application Determined on the Papers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Committee's costs application should be accepted despite being filed seven days out of time." "Whether the Appeal Panel's power to award costs derived from s 32 of the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1986 or s 88(1) of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997." 'Whether special circumstances warranted an award of costs in favour of the Committee.' "Whether Dr Lloyd's appeal was without any real prospect of success." 'Whether the late filing of amended grounds of appeal caused prejudice or inconvenience warranting a costs order.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Committee's late costs application was accepted because the administrative error was not serious and caused no prejudice. For the purposes of the application, the Panel proceeded on the basis that s 88(1) of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 applied and that special circumstances were required. Dr Lloyd's appeal was without any real prospect of success because the absence of any error of law in the Tribunal's reasoning was sufficiently evident at the outset, the alleged failures to consider relevant matters were contradicted by the Tribunal's reasons, and no difficult point of statutory or case law arose. That constituted special circumstances warranting an order that Dr...

Court Disposition

Costs application granted in part.

Orders

  • ["The Appellant is to pay the Respondent's costs of the appeal as agreed or assessed, excluding costs relating to the Appellant's application for an urgent stay heard on 25 October 2004." 'There will be no order for costs on this application by the Respondent.']