Wilderness Society Inc v Hon Malcolm Turnbull, Minister for Environment and Water Resources [2008] FCAFC 19

Wilderness Society Inc v Hon Malcolm Turnbull, Minister for Environment and Water Resources [2008] FCAFC 19

Given the significant public interest and the importance of clarifying legislative provisions, but also the need to compensate successful parties, it was appropriate to limit but not eliminate the respondents' recovery of costs: the appellant should pay 70% of the Minister's costs and 40% of Gunns' costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Costs Determination After Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Appellant to pay 70% of first respondent's costs and 40% of second respondent's costs.
Legal Topics
['costs Discretion' 'public Interest Litigation' 'award of Costs in Appellate Proceedings']
['practice and Procedure' 'environmental Law'] ['costs Discretion' 'public Interest Litigation' 'award of Costs in Appellate Proceedings']

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 / Costs Determination After Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether costs should be awarded in full against an unsuccessful appellant in public interest litigation' 'Extent to which costs recoverable by respondents should be limited in public interest litigation']

Ratio Decidendi

Given the significant public interest and the importance of clarifying legislative provisions, but also the need to compensate successful parties, it was appropriate to limit but not eliminate the respondents' recovery of costs: the appellant should pay 70% of the Minister's costs and 40% of Gunns' costs.

Court Disposition

Appellant to pay 70% of first respondent's costs and 40% of second respondent's costs.

Orders

  • ['The appellant pay 70% of the costs, including reserved costs, of the first respondent.' 'The appellant pay 40% of the costs, including reserved costs, of the second respondent.']