Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Martin v Norton Rose Fulbright Australia (No 12) [2020] FCA 1795 File number: SAD 49 of 2017
Judgment of: KERR J
Date of judgment: 15 December 2020
Catchwords: COSTS – application by successful Applicant for indemnity costs in his favour – where Applicant's conduct when self-represented had caused the Respondent to incur unnecessary costs – where Respondent found to have maintained groundless denials of critical aspects of the Applicant's case that he had been misled by it and subjected to a proceeding that constituted an abuse of process – finding that in those circumstances it would not be appropriate that the Applicant should have to pay any part of the costs of independent legal representation that he had incurred – special and unusual circumstances established – indemnity costs awarded
Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 570
Cases cited: Calderbank v Calderbank [1975] 3 All ER 333 Colgate Palmolive Co v Cussons Pty Ltd [1993] FCA 801; 46 FCR 225 DS Clarke Nominees Pty Ltd v Adder Holdings Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 277 Fair Work Ombudsman v Grouped Property Services (No 3) [2017] FCA 810 Independent Education Union of Australia v Australian International Academy of Education Inc [2016] FCA 686 Martin v Norton Rose Fulbright Australia (No 7) [2020] FCA 5 Martin v Norton Rose Fulbright Australia (No 11) [2020] FCA 1641 Whelan v Cigarette & Gift Warehouse [2019] FCA 2064
Division: Fair Work Division
Registry: Victoria
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