Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
AZC20 v Minister for Home Affairs (No 2) [2021] FCA 1544 File numbers: VID 89 of 2021 VID 503 of 2021
Judgment of: RANGIAH J
Date of judgment: 10 December 2021
Catchwords: COSTS – application for indemnity costs – whether any special or unusual feature of the case justifies departure from the usual rule as to costs – no such feature – consideration of whether costs should be reserved until conclusion of both proceedings – party and party costs awarded to applicant for mandamus application – costs of habeas corpus application reserved until conclusion of that proceeding
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act (1976) (Cth) s 43(2) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 40.02
Cases cited: AJL20 v Commonwealth of Australia (2020) 279 FCR 549 AZC20 v Minister for Home Affairs [2021] FCA 1234 Commonwealth of Australia v AJL20 [2021] HCA 21; (2021) 391 ALR 562 TSG Franchise Management Pty Ltd v Cigarette & Gift Warehouse (Franchising) Pty Ltd (No 3) [2016] FCA 828
Division: General Division
Registry: Victoria
National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights
Number of paragraphs: 19
Date of last submissions: 29 October 2021 (Applicant) 11 November 2021 (Respondents)
Date of hearing: Determined on the papers
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr M Albert
Solicitor for the Applicant: Clothier Anderson Immigration Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondents: Ms A Wheatley QC and Mr B McGlade (18 and 19 May 2021) Mr P Knowles with Mr B McGlade (15 September 2021)
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