Smith v Australian Crime Commission [2005] FCA 1113

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Smith v Australian Crime Commission [2005] FCA 1113

COSTS – further prosecution of proceeding unnecessary – whether the parties acted reasonably in instituting and defending the proceeding – whether the applicants acted reasonably in the conduct of the proceeding.

Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 43

Australian Securities Commission v Aust‑Home Investments Ltd (1993) 44 FCR 194 cited Dr Martens Australia Pty Ltd v Figgins Holdings Pty Ltd No 2 [2000] FCA 602 referred to Hughes v Western Australian Cricket Association (Inc) (1986) ATPR 40‑748 referred to Re Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs; Ex parte Lai Qin (1997) 186 CLR 622 applied STEWART RODNEY SMITH AND BERENDINA JACOBA SMITH v AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION NSD 1837 of 2004 BRANSON J 15 AUGUST 2005 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1837 of 2004

BETWEEN: STEWART RODNEY SMITH

FIRST APPLICANT

BERENDINA JACOBA SMITH

SECOND APPLICANT

AND: AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: BRANSON J

DATE OF ORDER: 15 AUGUST 2005

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The applicants pay the respondent's costs: (a) from 1 April 2005 – 29 April 2005 inclusive; and (b) of and incidental to the hearing on 5 August 2005. 2. There otherwise be no order as to the costs of the proceeding.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1837 of 2004

BETWEEN: STEWART RODNEY SMITH

FIRST APPLICANT

BERENDINA JACOBA SMITH

SECOND APPLICANT

AND: AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: BRANSON J

DATE: 15 AUGUST 2005

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

introduction 1 The parties agree that the further prosecution of this proceeding is unnecessary but they are unable to agree as to the appropriate order, if any, to be made concerning the costs of the proceeding. It is thus necessary for the Court to determine that question.