Bannister v New Zealand [1999] FCA 838

Bannister v New Zealand [1999] FCA 838

As the appellant succeeded on appeal and the original order was substituted, the appellant is entitled to costs in the Federal Court and Supreme Court, but as no order for costs was sought in the Magistrates Court, no order should be made regarding those costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 June 1999
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment After Appeal From the Supreme Court of Queensland
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; costs awarded to appellant for Federal Court and Supreme Court proceedings; no order for Magistrates Court costs.
Legal Topics
['costs on Appeal' 'extradition Order' 'jurisdiction of Federal Court']
['extradition' 'criminal Law'] ['costs on Appeal' 'extradition Order' 'jurisdiction of Federal Court']

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 / Judgment After Appeal From the Supreme Court of Queensland

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appellant is entitled to costs after a successful appeal against an extradition order' 'Whether costs of proceedings before the Magistrate should be awarded']

Ratio Decidendi

As the appellant succeeded on appeal and the original order was substituted, the appellant is entitled to costs in the Federal Court and Supreme Court, but as no order for costs was sought in the Magistrates Court, no order should be made regarding those costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; costs awarded to appellant for Federal Court and Supreme Court proceedings; no order for Magistrates Court costs.

Orders

  • ["The first respondent is to pay the appellant's costs of proceedings in this Court and in the Supreme Court." 'No order as to the costs in the Magistrates Court.']