Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Maletic v Comcare [2016] FCA 1111 Appeal from: Maletic v Comcare (Compensation) [2016] AATA 210
File number: QUD 285 of 2016
Judge: COLLIER J
Date of judgment: 9 September 2016
Catchwords: COSTS – Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 40.51 – applicant seeks order that maximum costs recoverable on a party to party basis be capped – factors relevant to Court's discretion – Perrett v Commissioner for Superannuation (1991) 23 ALD 257 not relevant – applicant claimed likelihood of discontinuing proceeding if not costs not capped – negligible evidence regarding the applicant's claim of financial hardship – no public interest claim – no issue of general importance raised by case – no novel point of law – low amount sought to be capped – application dismissed
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 43 Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) ss 5A, 5A(1), 14 Superannuation Act 1976 (Cth) ss 66(2), 67 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 40.51 Federal Court Rules 1979 (Cth) O 62 r 1
Cases cited: Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Reeve (2012) 199 FCR 463 Corcoran v Virgin Blue Airlines Pty Ltd [2008] FCA 864 Drenth v Comcare [2012] FCAFC 86 Haraksin v Murrays Australia Ltd [2010] FCA 1133 King v Jetstar Airways Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 413 King v Virgin Australia Airlines Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 36 Perrett v Commissioner for Superannuation (1991) 23 ALD 257 Shurat Hadin, Israel Law Centre v Lynch (No 2) [2014] FCA 413
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