Woodward v Repatriation Commission [2003] FCAFC 160
Federal Court of Australia
Full text
Select any passage to save a personal note with optional tags.
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Woodward v Repatriation Commission [2003] FCAFC 160
SUPPLEMENTARY REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
ROBERT CHARLES WOODWARD v REPATRIATION COMMISSION
V531 of 2002
MAVIS GUNDRY v REPATRIATION COMMISSION
V532 of 2002
BLACK CJ, WEINBERG & SELWAY JJ
30 JULY 2003 (SUPPLEMENTARY REASONS 9 SEPTEMBER 2003)
MELBOURNE
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V531 OF 2002
On appeal from the Veterans' Appeals
Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal
BETWEEN: ROBERT CHARLES WOODWARD
APPLICANT
AND: REPATRIATION COMMISSION
RESPONDENT
JUDGES: BLACK CJ, WEINBERG & SELWAY JJ
DATE OF ORDER: 9 SEPTEMBER 2003
WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE
THE COURT ORDERS (IN ADDITION TO ORDERS 1, 2 AND 3 OF 30 JULY 2003) THAT:
1. The respondent pay the applicant's costs.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V532 OF 2002
On appeal from the Veterans' Appeals
Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal
BETWEEN: MAVIS GUNDRY
APPLICANT
AND: REPATRIATION COMMISSION
RESPONDENT
JUDGES: BLACK CJ, WEINBERG & SELWAY JJ
DATE OF ORDER: 9 SEPTEMBER 2003
WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE
THE COURT ORDERS (IN ADDITION TO ORDERS 1 AND 2 OF 30 JULY 2003) THAT:
1. There be no order as to costs.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V531 OF 2002
On appeal from the Veterans' Appeals
Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal
BETWEEN: ROBERT CHARLES WOODWARD
APPLICANT
AND: REPATRIATION COMMISSION
RESPONDENT
V532 OF 2002
BETWEEN: MAVIS GUNDRY
APPLICANT
AND: REPATRIATION COMMISSION
RESPONDENT
JUDGES: BLACK CJ, WEINBERG & SELWAY JJ
DATE: 30 JULY 2003 (SUPPLEMENTARY REASONS 9 SEPTEMBER 2003)
WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AS TO COSTS
THE COURT:
1 When judgment was delivered in these two matters on 30 July 2003, the parties were ordered to file submissions as to costs. The submissions indicate that the parties agree as to the costs orders that should be made. The proposed orders are appropriate and we shall order accordingly.
2 In the matter of Woodward, the respondent should pay the applicant's costs and in the matter of Gundry there should be no order as to costs.
I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Chief Justice Black, Justice Weinberg and Justice Selway.
Associate:
Dated: 9 September 2003
Counsel for the Applicants: Mr M Croyle and Ms J Bornstein
Solicitors for the Applicants: Williams, Winter, Higgs Solicitors
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr P Hanks QC with Mr P J Ginnane
Solicitors for the Respondents: Australian Government Solicitor
Date of Hearing: 19 February 2003
Date of Judgment: 30 July 2003 (Supplementary Reasons 9 September 2003)
Date of Final Submissions: 7 August 2003