Mees v Kemp (No 2) [2004] FCA 549

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Mees v Kemp (No 2) [2004] FCA 549

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – costs – public interest litigation – applicant unsuccessful – discretion to award costs – how exercised Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) ss 11(1)(c), 13 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) ss 78, 487 and 488 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 43(2) Mees v Kemp [2004] FCA 366 referred to Ruddock v Vadarlis(No 2) (2001) 115 FCR 229 discussed Oshlack v Richmond River Council (1998) 193 CLR 72 discussed South-West Forest Defence Foundation Inc v Executive Director of Department of Conservation and Land Management (No 2) (1998) 154 ALR 411 referred to North Australian Aboriginal Legal Aid Service Inc v Bradley (No 2) [2002] FCA 564 referred to Buddhist Society of Western Australia (Inc) v Shire of Serpentine-Jarrahdale [1999] WASCA 55 discussed Hollier v Australian Maritime Safety Authority (No 2) [1998] FCA 975 referred to

PAUL ANDREW MEES v DAVID KEMP (in his capacity as Minister for the Environment and Heritage) and SOUTHERN AND EASTERN INTEGRATED TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

V456 of 2003

WEINBERG J

3 MAY 2004

MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V456 OF 2003

BETWEEN: PAUL ANDREW MEES

APPLICANT

AND: DAVID KEMP (in his capacity as Minister for the Environment and Heritage)

FIRST RESPONDENT

SOUTHERN AND EASTERN INTEGRATED TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE: WEINBERG J

DATE OF ORDER: 3 MAY 2004

WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The applicant pay fifty per cent of the first respondent's costs of and incidental to the substantive application, such costs be taxed in default of agreement. 2. There be no order as to costs in relation to the preparation of written contentions regarding costs. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.