Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Botany Bay City Council v Minister of State for Transport & Regional Development [1999] FCA 65
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - costs – "public interest" litigation – whether relevant to the question of costs – general approach to the award of costs – whether relevant that parties are public bodies Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 43 Re Wilcox; Ex parte Venture Industries Pty Ltd (1996) 141 ALR 727 applied Oshlack v Richmond River Council (1998) 152 ALR 83 cited Friends of Hinchinbrook Society Inc v Minister for the Environment [1998] FCA 432 cited Attorney-General (UK) v Heinemann Publishers Australia Pty Ltd (1987) 10 NSWLR 86 cited
BOTANY BAY CITY COUNCIL v MINISTER OF STATE FOR TRANSPORT & REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT, MINISTER OF STATE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT and AIRSERVICES AUSTRALIA
NG 877 OF 1997
RANDWICK CITY COUNCIL and WOOLLAHRA MUNICIPAL COUNCIL v MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT and MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT & REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT
NG 881 OF 1997
FINN J 3 FEBRUARY 1999 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NG 877 OF 1997
BETWEEN: BOTANY BAY CITY COUNCIL
Applicant
AND: MINISTER OF STATE FOR TRANSPORT AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT
First Respondent
MINISTER OF STATE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT
Second Respondent
AIRSERVICES AUSTRALIA
Third Respondent
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NG 881 OF 1997
BETWEEN: RANDWICK CITY COUNCIL
First Applicant
WOOLLAHRA MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Second Applicant
AND: MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate