Austin, B.R. v. Tax Agents Board [1985] FCA 274

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

GENERAL DIVISION

a c > ry { 2 i \ Se / ae Sf

wee vw

BETWEEN : AND: ORDER JUDGE MAKING ORDER : Morling J. DATE OF ORDER : 13 June 1985 WHERE MADE : Sydney

THE COURT ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:

1. Costs of the application

respondent.

ty

Matter remitted to

hearing.

the

No. G 23 of 1985

BRIAN ROLAND AUSTIN

Applicant TAX AGENTS' BOARD

Respondent

to be paid by the

Board for further

"i

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY No. G 23 of 1985

GENERAL DIVISION

BETWEEN : BRIAN ROLAND AUSTIN

Applicant AND: TAX AGENTS' BOARD Respondent MORLING J. 13 June 1985

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

On 7 June I delivered reasons in this matter for answering in the neaqative a preliminary question of law submitted to the Court. I then made an order that the decision of the Tax Agents' Board of 7" August 1984 refusing to qrant tne applicant's application for registration as a tax

agent be quashed.

I stood ths matter over unt1i today to deal with the question of costs and to decide tne future course of the

Litigation.

On the question of costs =f am of the view that the respontent shcuid pay the applicant's costs. The arclicant

has zucceedea aun tna proce

i] th

dings cto aat and cs. crdinary

principles that success would lead to him getting an order for

costs in his favour.

It is true, as counsel for the respondent has indicated, that the respondent in argument adopted an almost neutral position as to the way in which the question of law

should be answered. Nevetheless, it was answered in a way

favourable to the applicant.

Moreover, the decision of the Court on the questisn will be of use to the respondent Board in determining future applications for registration as tax agents. For all those reasons I think the appropriate order is that the respondent

should pay the applicant's costs.