Sydney Ferries Corporation v Australian Maritime Officers Union (No 3) [2008] FCA 960

Sydney Ferries Corporation v Australian Maritime Officers Union (No 3) [2008] FCA 960

SFC's interlocutory applications against the respondents were instituted without reasonable cause or constituted unreasonable acts as defined in the Workplace Relations Act; pursuing injunctive relief in the AIRC while proceedings in the Federal Court remained unresolved necessitated the respondents' anti-suit motions and thus SFC caused the respondents to incur costs by unreasonable act in connection with the proceeding.

Parties
Applicant: Sydney Ferries Corporation; First Respondent: Australian Maritime Officers Union; Second Respondents: Maritime Union of Australia & Seamens' Union of Australia, New South Wales Branch; Third Respondent: Australian Institute of Marine & Power Engineers
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Costs Application Following Interlocutory and Anti Suit Injunction Motions / Post Interlocutory Hearing; Costs Determination
Outcome
Costs orders made: SFC to pay costs as outlined.
Legal Topics
Costs, Interlocutory Relief, Anti Suit Injunctions, Jurisdiction, Workplace Relations Act
Employment Law Industrial Relations Civil Procedure Costs Interlocutory Relief Anti Suit Injunctions Jurisdiction Workplace Relations Act

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 7 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sydney Ferries Corporation

Applicant

Australian Maritime Officers Union

First Respondent

Maritime Union of Australia & Seamens' Union of Australia, New South Wales Branch

Second Respondents

Australian Institute of Marine & Power Engineers

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Costs Application Following Interlocutory and Anti Suit Injunction Motions / Post Interlocutory Hearing; Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether SFC's application was instituted vexatiously or without reasonable cause under Workplace Relations Act s 824
  2. 2 Whether SFC, by an unreasonable act or omission, caused other parties to incur costs in connection with the proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

SFC's interlocutory applications against the respondents were instituted without reasonable cause or constituted unreasonable acts as defined in the Workplace Relations Act; pursuing injunctive relief in the AIRC while proceedings in the Federal Court remained unresolved necessitated the respondents' anti-suit motions and thus SFC caused the respondents to incur costs by unreasonable act in connection with the proceeding.

Court Disposition

Costs orders made: SFC to pay costs as outlined.

Orders

  • SFC pay the costs of the first respondent, the second respondents and the third respondent of SFC's application for interlocutory relief heard on 28 May 2008.
  • SFC pay the costs of the first respondent and of the second respondents of the motions filed by them on 30 May 2008 and 29 May 2008 respectively.