Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Shafran v Repatriation Commission (No 2) [2020] FCA 1072 File number: QUD 424 of 2019
Judge: LOGAN J
Date of judgment: 28 July 2020
Catchwords: COSTS – where there was a wider public interest to be served by the application – where the first respondent had a particular interest in the correction of imperfect understandings of the relevant legislation – whether each party should bear its own costs or, alternatively, whether costs in favour of the applicant should be fixed or awarded on a percentage basis
Legislation: Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 43 Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 39B Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth) ss 147, 183, 184
Cases cited: Belton v General Motors Holden's Ltd (No 1) (1984) 58 ALJR 352 Cocoa Cola Amatil (PNG) Ltd v Yanda [2012] PGSC 52 Melbourne Steamship Co Ltd v Moorehead (1912) 15 CLR 333 Oshlack v Richmond River Council (1998) 193 CLR 72 R v Australian Broadcasting Tribunal; Ex parte Hardiman (1980) 144 CLR 13 Shafran v Repatriation Commission [2019] FCA 1833 Shelton v Repatriation Commission (1999) 85 FCR 587 Singh v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (unreported, Burchett J, 20 July 1998)
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