Roberts, J.T. v Murlar Pty Ltd & Ors [1986] FCA 414

aug AIG

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) N.S.W. G164 of 1986

GENERAL DIVISION

BETWEEN : JOHN THOMAS ROBERTS Applicant AND: MURLAR PTY. LIMITED First Respondent AND: THE BUILDING WORKER'S INDUSTRIAL UNION OF AUSTRALIA Second Respondent AND: MARIO ALBERICL Third Respondent AND: LEW _ZIVANOVIC Fourth Respondent MINUTES OF ORDER JUDGE MAKING ORDER: PINCUS J.

DATE OF ORDER:

4 SEPTEMBER 1986

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The costs of and incidental to all the proceedings

be taxed and paid by the applicant to the respondents, with the following exceptions:

(i)

(ii)

the costs of any interlocutory hearings which were not reserved or made costs in the proceedings, in respect of which there will be no order;

the costs of the hearing before Jackson J. on 28 July 1986, in respect of which it is ordered that the applicant's costs of that hearing be paid by the second and third respondents.

2. The costs of today's proceedings be included in the costs to be paid by the applicant to the respondents. i

Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in

Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) N.S.W. G164 of 1986 GENERAL DIVISION )

BETWEEN: JOHN THOMAS ROBERTS Applicant

AND: MURLAR PTY. LIMITED

First Respondent

AND: THE BUILDING WORKER'S INDUSTRIAL UNION OF AUSTRALIA Second Respondent

AND: MARIO ALBERICI

Third Respondent AND: LEW ZIVANOVIC

Fourth Respondent

PINCUS J. 4 SEPTEMBER 1986

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

I have dismissed the applicant's claims for relief under

s.45E of the Trade Practices Act, but now have to dispose of

certain questions relating to costs. Five points arise.

1. The unsuccessful applicant says that there should only be one set of costs on the other side. The principle on which I was invited to decide the matter was that there was no need for the respondents to remain at arm's length. The