BDR21 v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (No 2) [2021] FCA 1347

Federal Court of Australia

BDR21 v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (No 2) [2021] FCA 1347 File number(s): NSD 290 of 2021

Judgment of: HALLEY J

Date of judgment: 2 November 2021

Catchwords: COSTS – where respondent gave notice of intention to file interlocutory application in relation to statement of claim – where applicant gave no indication of intention to amend statement of claim – where respondent subsequently filed interlocutory application and supporting affidavit, and applicant then served an amended statement of claim – application of 18(2)(b) of the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013 (Cth) – whether any act or omission of the applicant was unreasonable and caused the respondent to incur costs – where applicant's conduct not sufficiently unreasonable – where costs thrown away cannot be calculated with precision – no order as to costs

Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 570 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 37M Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987 (Cth) Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013 (Cth) s 18 Revised Explanatory Memorandum, Public Interest Disclosure Bill 2013 (Cth)

Cases cited: Construction Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v Clarke (2008) 170 FCR 574; [2008] FCAFC 143 Fair Work Ombudsman v Foot & Thai Massage Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (No 2) [2020] FCA 348 Fair Work Ombudsman v Grouped Property Services Pty Ltd (No 3) [2017] FCA 810 Hutchinson v Comcare (No 2) [2017] FCA 370 Hutchinson v Comcare (No 5) [2019] FCA 1665 Mutch v ISG Management Pty Ltd (No 2) [2020] FCA 954 Tran v Kodari Securities Pty Ltd (No 2) [2020] FCA 1819 Tucker v State of Victoria [No 2] [2021] VSCA 182