Johnson v Free Spirit Management Pty Ltd (No 3) [2011] NSWADT 147

Johnson v Free Spirit Management Pty Ltd (No 3) [2011] NSWADT 147

Although Mr Johnson was successful on his discrimination and victimisation complaints, the Tribunal was not satisfied that it was fair to depart from the general rule that each party bears its own costs. Mr Johnson was represented by his father, who was not legally qualified and was not acting in a professional capacity, so lost wages for Mr Johnson or his parents were not recoverable. The Tribunal was not persuaded that the respondents unreasonably caused delay, failed to comply with directions, prolonged the proceedings, or deliberately misled the Tribunal. In all the circumstances, the statutory and practice-note factors did not justify ordering the respondents to pay the claimed costs...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Application for Costs in Equal Opportunity Division Proceedings Concerning Age Discrimination in the Provision of Goods and Services and Victimisation / On the Papers After the Tribunal Had Determined the Complaints Were Substantiated
Outcome
The application for costs is dismissed.
Legal Topics
['costs in Administrative Decisions Tribunal Proceedings' 'self Represented Party Costs' 'age Discrimination' 'victimisation' 'practice Note Number 22']
['administrative Law' 'anti Discrimination Law' 'costs'] ['costs in Administrative Decisions Tribunal Proceedings' 'self Represented Party Costs' 'age Discrimination' 'victimisation' 'practice Note Number 22']

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 in Equal Opportunity Division Proceedings Concerning Age Discrimination in the Provision of Goods and Services and Victimisation / On the Papers After the Tribunal Had Determined the Complaints Were Substantiated

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether it was fair under section 88 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 to award costs to the successful applicant.' 'Whether a self-represented applicant represented by a non-lawyer agent could recover lost wages, loss of income, general inconvenience, or out-of-pocket expenses.' 'Whether the respondents conducted the proceedings in a way that unnecessarily disadvantaged the applicant, prolonged the proceedings, or attempted to deceive the Tribunal.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although Mr Johnson was successful on his discrimination and victimisation complaints, the Tribunal was not satisfied that it was fair to depart from the general rule that each party bears its own costs. Mr Johnson was represented by his father, who was not legally qualified and was not acting in a professional capacity, so lost wages for Mr Johnson or his parents were not recoverable. The Tribunal was not persuaded that the respondents unreasonably caused delay, failed to comply with directions, prolonged the proceedings, or deliberately misled the Tribunal. In all the circumstances, the statutory and practice-note factors did not justify ordering the respondents to pay the claimed costs...

Court Disposition

The application for costs is dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application for costs is dismissed.']