Williams v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs (No 2) [2020] FCA 1174

Federal Court of Australia

Williams v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs (No 2) [2020] FCA 1174 File number/s: VID 424 of 2017

Judgment of: WHEELAHAN J

Date of judgment: 18 August 2020

Catchwords: COSTS – whether to reduce costs payable by the applicant to the respondent on account of the respondent's conduct of the proceeding – respondent's entitlement to costs reduced by 10% because of his solicitors' errors in the preparation of the court book that caused additional costs to be incurred.

Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1979 (Cth) s 43

Cases cited: Northern Territory v Sangare [2019] HCA 25; 265 CLR 164

Division: General Division

Registry: Victoria

National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights

Number of paragraphs: 10

Date of hearing: Determined on the papers

Counsel for the Applicant: The applicant was self-represented

Counsel for the Respondent: R Knowles SC

Solicitor for the Respondent: Sparke Helmore

ORDERS VID 424 of 2017

BETWEEN: SIMON MICHAEL WILLIAMS Applicant

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION, CITIZENSHIP, MIGRANT SERVICES AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS Respondent

order made by: WHEELAHAN J DATE OF ORDER: 18 August 2020

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The applicant pay 90% of the respondent's costs, as agreed or taxed. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

WHEELAHAN J:

Introduction 1 On 12 June 2020, the Court dismissed the applicant's further amended originating application for judicial review of a decision made by the Assistant Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, pursuant to s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), not to revoke an earlier decision to cancel the applicant's visa on character grounds: Williams v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCA 814. At that time, the Court also made orders that the parties file and serve written submissions or an agreed note as to costs, and that the question of costs be determined on the papers. 2 For the following reasons, I have decided that the applicant should pay 90% of the Minister's costs on the usual party and party basis, as agreed or taxed.