Wright v Chief Commissioner of Police (Vic) [2020] FCA 21

Wright v Chief Commissioner of Police (Vic) [2020] FCA 21

The conduct of the respondent in respect of the interlocutory applications was not so unreasonable as to depart from the ordinary rule that, absent a hearing on the merits, costs are in the cause. Special circumstances justifying an adverse costs order were not established. The respondent is only to pay the applicant's costs thrown away by reason of amending the defence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Applications Regarding Discovery and Non Disclosure; Discrimination Claim / Costs Determination After Dismissal of Applications by Consent, Prior to Trial
Outcome
Respondent to pay applicant's costs thrown away by reason of amendment of the Amended Defence; costs of the applications are costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'discovery' 'public Interest Immunity' 'disability Discrimination' 'employment Discrimination']
['administrative Law' 'human Rights Law'] ['costs' 'discovery' 'public Interest Immunity' 'disability Discrimination' 'employment Discrimination']

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

Interlocutory Applications Regarding Discovery and Non Disclosure; Discrimination Claim / Costs Determination After Dismissal of Applications by Consent, Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the respondent should pay the applicant's costs of the interlocutory applications that were dismissed by consent" "Whether the respondent's conduct regarding the applications was so unreasonable as to justify an adverse costs order"]

Ratio Decidendi

The conduct of the respondent in respect of the interlocutory applications was not so unreasonable as to depart from the ordinary rule that, absent a hearing on the merits, costs are in the cause. Special circumstances justifying an adverse costs order were not established. The respondent is only to pay the applicant's costs thrown away by reason of amending the defence.

Court Disposition

Respondent to pay applicant's costs thrown away by reason of amendment of the Amended Defence; costs of the applications are costs in the cause.

Orders

  • ["The respondent pay the applicant's costs thrown away by reason of the amendment of the Amended Defence." "The costs of the applicant's interlocutory application filed 1 April 2019 and the respondent's interlocutory application filed 3 July 2019 be costs in the cause."]