Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZITH (No 2) v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FCA 1932
SZITH v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP and REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
NSD 1414 of 2008
MIDDLETON J
18 DECEMBER 2008
MELBOURNE (HEARD IN SYDNEY)
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1414 of 2008
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZITH
Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: MIDDLETON J
DATE OF ORDER: 18 DECEMBER 2008
WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE (HEARD IN SYDNEY)
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The orders of the Federal Magistrates Court be set aside. 2. There be no order as to costs of the proceedings before the Federal Magistrates Court. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules. The text of entered orders can be located using eSearch on the Court's website. IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1414 of 2008
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZITH
Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: MIDDLETON J
DATE: 18 DECEMBER 2008
PLACE: MELBOURNE (HEARD IN SYDNEY)
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 On 10 December 2008, the Court upheld the appellant's appeal and ordered that the matter be remitted to the Federal Magistrates Court differently constituted to determine the question of whether the Tribunal's decision was affected by apprehended bias, and that there be no order as to costs of the appeal. 2 The appellant seeks the following orders in respect of costs (which application I indicated I would entertain upon pronouncing orders on 10 December 2008): a. the respondent pay the appellant's costs of the appeal; b. the costs of the Federal Magistrates Court proceedings be reserved for the Federal Magistrate allocated to hear the matter on remittal. 3 The appellant seeks the costs of the appeal based on the ordinary rule that costs follow the event, that event being that the appeal was successful and the decision of the Federal Magistrates Court had been set aside. 4 Undoubtedly, the principle behind ordering costs is to indemnify the successful party for the cost of vindicating his or her position: see generally Oshlack v Richmond River Council (1998) 193 CLR 72, at 75 per Brennan CJ; and 97-8 per McHugh J. 5 The appellant has been successful on a ground which has always formed part of the appeal, namely the refusal of the Federal Magistrate to admit evidence. I observe that the appellant has not failed on the other ground relating to the bias point (the point independent of the evidence of Ms Peterson) as the Court declined to determine that ground in light of the success of the ground concerning Ms Peterson. 6 It is not suggested, nor is there any basis to suggest, any misconduct in the appeal. The grounds rejected were not unarguable or improperly placed before the Court for consideration. 7 However, in the appropriate case while costs ordinarily follow the event, a litigant who has succeeded on only a portion of their claim or failed on certain issues may have to bear the expense of those parts or be ordered to pay the other party's costs of those issues: see Ruddock v Vardalis (No 2) (2001) 115 FCR 229 at 234-5 per Black CJ and French J. 8 In light of the Court's reasons and orders both parties have had a measure of success. In my view an order as to costs in favour of the appellant would not be appropriate in view of the discrete grounds upon which the appellant failed, including substantive challenges to the Tribunal's decision. After all, the main contention of the appellant was to have the Tribunal's decision set aside. 9 Therefore, I will not vary the order that there be no order as to costs. As there was no legal representation on behalf of the appellant before the Federal Magistrates Court, I will order that there be no order as to costs before the Federal Magistrates Court. 10 The previous orders made on 10 December 2008 will remain. 11 The orders of the Court today will be: 1. The orders of the Federal Magistrates Court be set aside. 2. There be no order as to costs of the proceedings before the Federal Magistrates Court. I certify that the preceding eleven (11) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Middleton.
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