Murray v Registrar of the National Native Title Tribunal [2003] FCA 45

Murray v Registrar of the National Native Title Tribunal [2003] FCA 45

Although the proceeding was not formally under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), it was centrally concerned with provisions of that legislation and raised issues of public interest about the correct construction of ILUA provisions, so it was in the interests of justice to make no general costs order against Ms Murray. However, Blairgowrie was entitled to its costs of the joinder motion because Ms Murray's opposition to joinder was unreasonable given Blairgowrie's obvious interest in the outcome and the absence at that stage of an active contradictor.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 February 2003
Procedural Posture
Application for Costs Following Dismissal of an Application Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 (cth) Concerning Registration of an Indigenous Land Use Agreement / Costs Determination After Reasons for Judgment Published on 20 December 2002
Outcome
The applicant was ordered to pay the second respondent's costs of and associated with its joinder motion, but otherwise there was no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['costs Discretion' 'costs Following the Event' 'joinder of Respondent' 'indigenous Land Use Agreements' 'registration of Indigenous Land Use Agreement' 'native Title Act 1993 (cth) S 85 A']
['costs' 'administrative Law' 'native Title'] ['costs Discretion' 'costs Following the Event' 'joinder of Respondent' 'indigenous Land Use Agreements' 'registration of Indigenous Land Use Agreement' 'native Title Act 1993 (cth) S 85 A']

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 Following Dismissal of an Application Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 (cth) Concerning Registration of an Indigenous Land Use Agreement / Costs Determination After Reasons for Judgment Published on 20 December 2002

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the second respondent should have its costs paid after successfully opposing the applicant in circumstances where it applied to be joined because it had an interest in the outcome and the first respondent did not propose to take an active role.' 'Whether the Court should take into account the spirit of s 85A of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), although the proceeding was not formally commenced under that Act.' "Whether the applicant's opposition to the second respondent's joinder motion was unreasonable."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although the proceeding was not formally under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), it was centrally concerned with provisions of that legislation and raised issues of public interest about the correct construction of ILUA provisions, so it was in the interests of justice to make no general costs order against Ms Murray. However, Blairgowrie was entitled to its costs of the joinder motion because Ms Murray's opposition to joinder was unreasonable given Blairgowrie's obvious interest in the outcome and the absence at that stage of an active contradictor.

Court Disposition

The applicant was ordered to pay the second respondent's costs of and associated with its joinder motion, but otherwise there was no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['The applicant pay the second respondent its costs of, and associated with, its motion of 18 March 2002 to be joined as a respondent to the proceeding, such costs to be taxed in default of agreement.' 'Otherwise there be no order as to costs.']