Kerrison v Melbourne City Council [2014] FCA 523

Kerrison v Melbourne City Council [2014] FCA 523

Given the appellant's impecuniosity, the public law significance of the appeal, and in the absence of exceptional circumstances, security for costs is not warranted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
Applications for security for costs dismissed; costs awarded in favour of appellant for these applications.
Legal Topics
['security for Costs' 'impecunious Litigants' 'representative Proceedings' 'local Government Law' 'statutory Interpretation' 'freedom of Political Communication' 'freedom of Assembly']

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

Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs

  1. 1 ['Whether security for costs should be ordered in appeal by impecunious litigant raising public law questions' 'Whether appeal raises arguable issues of public importance']

Ratio Decidendi

Given the appellant's impecuniosity, the public law significance of the appeal, and in the absence of exceptional circumstances, security for costs is not warranted.

Court Disposition

Applications for security for costs dismissed; costs awarded in favour of appellant for these applications.

Orders

  • ['The applications for security for costs of the appeal filed by the First Respondent and Third Respondent are dismissed.' "The First Respondent and Third Respondent pay the Appellant's costs of, and incidental to, the applications (if any), such costs to be taxed in default of agreement." 'Application for indemnity...