Purvinas v Wyse [2024] FCA 1122

Purvinas v Wyse [2024] FCA 1122

The proceedings were instituted vexatiously by Mr Purvinas for the predominant purpose of harassing, embarrassing, and destabilising the Federal Executive, who he saw as a threat to his role and employment, rather than to resolve a genuine legal dispute about the operation of the Union rules. Accordingly, this finding enlivens the discretion for an award of costs under s 329(1) of the RO Act, and the circumstances justify an award on an indemnity basis.

Parties
Applicant: Stephen Purvinas; First Respondent: Rodney Wyse; Second Respondent: Peter Gill; Fourth Respondent: Wayne Derndorfer; Fifth Respondent: Mark Gant; Sixth Respondent: Steve Re; Seventh Respondent: Christopher Burleigh; Eighth Respondent: Jamie Edwards; Eleventh Respondent: Dean Fitzpatrick; Twelfth Respondent: Kevin Baldacchino; Thirteenth Respondent: Matthew Rea; Fourteenth Respondent: Patrick Hildebrandt; Fifteenth Respondent: Michael Ward; Sixteenth Respondent: Stephen Fotoulis; Seventeenth Respondent: Edward Azzopardi; Eighteenth Respondent: Paul Staddon
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Costs Application in Discontinued Proceeding / Post Discontinuance, Application for Costs
Outcome
Application for indemnity costs granted against applicant
Legal Topics
Vexatious Proceedings, Costs – Indemnity Basis, Union Rules and Governance, Statutory Interpretation
Industrial Law Employment Law Practice and Procedure Vexatious Proceedings Costs – Indemnity Basis Union Rules and Governance Statutory Interpretation

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 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Purvinas

Applicant

Rodney Wyse

First Respondent

Peter Gill

Second Respondent

Wayne Derndorfer

Fourth Respondent

Mark Gant

Fifth Respondent

Steve Re

Sixth Respondent

Christopher Burleigh

Seventh Respondent

Jamie Edwards

Eighth Respondent

Dean Fitzpatrick

Eleventh Respondent

Kevin Baldacchino

Twelfth Respondent

Matthew Rea

Thirteenth Respondent

Patrick Hildebrandt

Fourteenth Respondent

Michael Ward

Fifteenth Respondent

Stephen Fotoulis

Sixteenth Respondent

Edward Azzopardi

Seventeenth Respondent

Paul Staddon

Eighteenth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Costs Application in Discontinued Proceeding / Post Discontinuance, Application for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proceedings were instituted vexatiously within the meaning of s 329(1) of the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether costs should be awarded against the applicant
  3. 3 Test applicable for vexatiously instituted proceedings under s 329(1) of the RO Act

Ratio Decidendi

The proceedings were instituted vexatiously by Mr Purvinas for the predominant purpose of harassing, embarrassing, and destabilising the Federal Executive, who he saw as a threat to his role and employment, rather than to resolve a genuine legal dispute about the operation of the Union rules. Accordingly, this finding enlivens the discretion for an award of costs under s 329(1) of the RO Act, and the circumstances justify an award on an indemnity basis.

Court Disposition

Application for indemnity costs granted against applicant

Orders

  • The applicant is ordered to pay the respondents’ costs on an indemnity basis, to be assessed by a Registrar of the Court on a lump sum basis in an amount to be determined.
  • The Registrar is directed to determine the quantum of the lump sum for costs payable, including on the papers if appropriate.