Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Finch v The Heat Group Pty Ltd (No 6) [2016] FCA 390 File number: VID 704 of 2012
Judge: JESSUP J
Date of judgment: 20 April 2016
Catchwords: COSTS – Whether respondents entitled to costs thrown away when not previously reserved – Adjusting costs for applicant's success in maintaining partial claim despite general strike out.
Legislation: Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth)
Cases cited: Low v Australian Tax Office [2000] FMCA 6
Date of hearing: Heard on the papers
Registry: Victoria
Division: General Division
National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 18
Counsel for the Applicant: The applicant appeared in person
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr M Felman
Solicitor for the Respondents: Minter Ellison
ORDERS VID 704 of 2012
BETWEEN: JO-ANNE FINCH Applicant
AND: THE HEAT GROUP PTY LTD (ACN 092 431 430) First Respondent
GILLIAN FRANKLIN Second Respondent
PETER KADLECIK (and others named in the Schedule) Third Respondent
JUDGE: JESSUP J DATE OF ORDER: 20 APRIL 2016
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The relief sought in para 7 of the respondents' Interlocutory Application filed on 28 November 2014 be refused. 2. The applicant pay 85% of the respondents' costs of their Interlocutory Application filed on 28 November 2014. 3. The applicant pay the respondents' costs incurred only in connection with the allegations made in the Further Amended Statement of Claim filed on 7 October 2014 (other than the allegation that the termination of the applicant's employment by the first respondent involved a contravention of a provision of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth)), not including – (a) the costs sought in para 7 of the respondents' Interlocutory Application filed on 28 November 2014; and (b) the costs of that Interlocutory Application. 4. Save as provided in the previous orders, the parties' costs of the proceeding be reserved, to be dealt with, if and when necessary, by the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
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