Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Oknalux Pty Ltd v Wilczynski (No 2) [2023] FCA 1444 File number(s): SAD 188 of 2020
Judgment of: O'SULLIVAN J
Date of judgment: 14 November 2023
Date of publication of reasons: 21 November 2023
Catchwords: COSTS – where applicants sought to file a notice of discontinuance – where respondents refused to provide consent – where respondents seek their costs of the action be paid by the applicants – where self-represented respondents have no entitlement to remuneration for time spent – where applicants do not oppose payment of the respondents' disbursements – leave granted to file notice of discontinuance
Legislation: Federal Court Act 1976 (Cth), s 43(2) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), r 26.12(2)(b)
Cases cited: Bell Lawyers Pty Ltd v Pentelow [2019] HCA 29; (2019) 269 CLR 333 Cachia v Hanes [1994] HCA 14; (1994) 179 CLR 403 Guss v Veenhuizen [No 2] [1976] HCA 57; (1976) 136 CLR 47 Orientile Pty Ltd v Salitrosa Holdings Pty Ltd (No 2) [2021] FCA 1224
Division: General Division
Registry: South Australia
National Practice Area: Other Federal Jurisdiction
Number of paragraphs: 11
Date of hearing: 14 November 2023
Counsel for the Applicants: Mr T Guthrie
Solicitor for the Applicants: Richards & Evans Commercial Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondents: The respondents appeared in person
ORDERS SAD 188 of 2020
BETWEEN: OKNALUX PTY LTD First Applicant
ALICJA MATEJKO Second Applicant
AND: EWA WILCZYNSKI First 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