Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Odzic v Commonwealth of Australia (as represented by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development) (No 2) [2017] FCA 556 File number: NSD 90 of 2016
Judge: ROBERTSON J
Date of judgment: 22 May 2017
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – costs – whether Court should award a party costs in a specified or lump sum and, if so, what sum – Practice Note (GPN-COSTS)
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 43 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 40.02(b)
Cases cited: Dattilo v Commonwealth of Australia (as represented by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development) [2017] FCA 329 Odzic v Commonwealth of Australia (as represented by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development) [2017] FCA 439
Date of hearing: Determined on the papers
Date of last submissions: 19 May 2017
Registry: New South Wales
Division: General Division
National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 13
Counsel for the Applicants: Mr P King
Solicitor for the Applicants: The People's Solicitors
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr D W Rayment
Solicitor for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor
ORDERS NSD 90 of 2016
BETWEEN: STOJAN ODZIC First Applicant
MELITTA ODZIC Second Applicant
AND: COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (AS REPRESENTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT) Respondent
JUDGE: ROBERTSON J DATE OF ORDER: 22 MAY 2017
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