Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Qantas Airways Limited v Lustig (No 2) [2015] FCA 782 Citation: Qantas Airways Limited v Lustig (No 2) [2015] FCA 782
Parties: QANTAS AIRWAYS LIMITED (ACN 009 661 901) v PETER LUSTIG, GIUSEPPE DE SIMONE and VICTORIAN CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
File number: NSD 1542 of 2013
Judge: PERRY J
Date of judgment: 31 July 2015
Catchwords: COSTS – where applicant succeeded in challenge to jurisdiction of state tribunal – general principle that successful litigant is awarded costs in their favour applies – relevance of monetary limit on jurisdiction in state tribunal to costs in Federal Court proceeding – whether applicant discharged obligations to take genuine steps to resolve the dispute under the Civil Dispute Resolution Act 2011 (Cth)
Legislation: Civil Aviation (Carriers' Liability) Act 1959 (Cth) Civil Dispute Resolution Act 2011 (Cth) ss 4, 6, 7, 11, 12, 15 Civil Procedure Act 2010 (Vic) s 4(3) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 37M, 37N Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 78B Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 (Vic) s 77, 83, 84, 88, 89, cl 4I(1) of Sch 1
Cases cited: Bowen Investments Pty Ltd v Tabcorp Holdings Ltd (No 2) [2008] FCAFC 107 Gray v Richards (No 2) [2014] HCA 47; (2014) 89 ALJR 113 Qantas Airways Limited v Lustig [2015] FCA 253; (2015) 228 FCR 148 Ruddock v Vadarlis (No 2) [2001] FCA 1865; (2001) 115 FCR 229 Scott v Secretary, Department of Social Security (No 2) [2000] FCA 1450
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