Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Russell v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (No 4) [2023] FCA 1279 File number: NSD 745 of 2022
Judgment of: LEE J
Date of judgment: 24 October 2023
Catchwords: COSTS – where applicant entitled to judgment and costs of protracted defamation proceeding – application for some costs on an indemnity basis – order for indemnity costs made because of consent notwithstanding a percentage of costs were incurred on account of false evidence being given by applicant
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 37M(1), 37M(3), 37M(4) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 1.35 Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) s 40(2)(a)
Cases cited: Callan v Chawk (Costs) [2023] FCA 1198 Murphy v Nationwide News Pty Ltd (No 2) [2021] FCA 432 Palmer v McGowan (No 6) [2022] FCA 927; (2022) 405 ALR 462 Russell v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (No 3) [2023] FCA 1223
Division: General Division
Registry: New South Wales
National Practice Area: Other Federal Jurisdiction
Number of paragraphs: 16
Date of hearing: 24 October 2023
Counsel for the applicant: Ms S Chrysanthou SC with Mr N Olson
Solicitors for the applicant: Company Giles
Counsel for the respondents: Ms M Cowden
Solicitors for the respondents: Australian Broadcasting Corporation Legal Services
ORDERS NSD 745 of 2022
BETWEEN: HESTON RUSSELL Applicant
AND: AUSTRALIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION First Respondent
JOSHUA ROBERTSON Second Respondent
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