Summers v Repatriation Commission (No 2) [2015] FCAFC 64

Summers v Repatriation Commission (No 2) [2015] FCAFC 64

Given the applicant’s limited success, the failure of the grounds and submissions advanced by his solicitors to assist the Court or focus on the real issues, and the substantial part played by the solicitors’ conduct in prolonging the litigation and causing unnecessary hearings, there is justification to depart from the usual rule. Each party should bear its own costs, and the applicant’s solicitors should not be permitted to recover professional fees for the relevant proceedings, subject to further submissions.

Parties
Appellant: Ronald John Summers; Respondent: Repatriation Commission
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Costs Determination After Full Court Appeal
Outcome
Each party to bear its own costs; provisional order restricting applicant's solicitors from recovering professional fees unless further submissions are filed.
Legal Topics
Costs, Discretion to Award Costs, Departure From Usual Rule Regarding Costs
Practice and Procedure Costs Discretion to Award Costs Departure From Usual Rule Regarding 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 2 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ronald John Summers

Appellant

Repatriation Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Costs Determination After Full Court Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the successful appellant should be awarded costs in the appeal and at first instance given the conduct of the case by the appellant's solicitor
  2. 2 Whether costs should be awarded against the appellant or the appellant’s solicitors due to their conduct
  3. 3 Whether the solicitors for the appellant should be permitted to recover professional fees for work performed

Ratio Decidendi

Given the applicant’s limited success, the failure of the grounds and submissions advanced by his solicitors to assist the Court or focus on the real issues, and the substantial part played by the solicitors’ conduct in prolonging the litigation and causing unnecessary hearings, there is justification to depart from the usual rule. Each party should bear its own costs, and the applicant’s solicitors should not be permitted to recover professional fees for the relevant proceedings, subject to further submissions.

Court Disposition

Each party to bear its own costs; provisional order restricting applicant's solicitors from recovering professional fees unless further submissions are filed.

Orders

  • Each party bear its own costs of the proceedings before Mortimer J and of this appeal.
  • The solicitors for the Appellant have leave to file further submissions on or before 21 May 2015 as to whether or not an order in the terms proposed in paragraph 32 of the reasons for judgment delivered today should be made.