Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Haros v Linfox Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2011] FCA 1223 Citation: Haros v Linfox Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2011] FCA 1223
Parties: GEORGE GABRIEL HAROS v LINFOX AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (ACN 004 718 647) and TIMOTHY ANDERSON
File number: VID 868 of 2009
Judge: TRACEY J
Date of judgment: 28 October 2011
Catchwords: COSTS – indemnity costs – offers of compromise made before trial – not accepted by applicant - judgment in favour of respondents - rebuttable presumption of making indemnity costs orders in favour of respondents – onus on applicant to show "compelling and exceptional circumstances" to justify not ordering indemnity costs - presumption not displaced
Legislation: Federal Court Rules 1979 (Cth) O 23, r 11 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) R 1.04
Cases cited: Futuretronics.com.au Pty Ltd v Graphix Labels Pty Ltd [2009] FCAFC 40 considered, applied IFTC Broking Services Limited v Commissioner of Taxation (2010) 268 ALR 1 cited Port Kembla Coal Terminal Limited v Braverus Maritime Inc (No 2) (2004) 212 ALR 281 cited
Date of hearing: Heard on the papers
Date of last submissions: 22 September 2011
Place: Melbourne
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 43
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr S Wood & Mr J Snaden
Solicitor for the Applicant: Holding Redlich
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr J Bourke SC & Mr A Weinstock
Solicitor for the Respondents: Lander & Rogers
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION VID 868 of 2009
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