Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Sydney Local Health Network v QY and QZ (No 2) [2012] NSWCA 71 Hearing dates: On the papers Decision date: 05 April 2012 Before: Campbell JA at [1]; Macfarlan JA at [1]; Young JA at [1] Decision: Order that the respondents be granted a certificate under the Suitors Fund Act 1951 in respect of the costs of the appeal including the costs of the motion of 23 December 2011. [Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.] Cases Cited: Trust Company of Australia Ltd v Skiwing Pty Ltd [2006] NSWCA 387; 68 NSWLR 366 Category: Consequential orders Parties: Sydney Local Health Network (formerly Sydney South West Area Health Service) (Appellant) QY (First Respondent) QZ (Second Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Dr M A Perry QC and L A Clegg (Appellant) Dr C S Ward and S J Walsh (Respondents) Solicitors: GILD Insurance Litigation Pty Ltd (Appellant) HIV/AIDS Legal Centre Incorporated (Respondents) File Number(s): CA 2010/244324 Decision under appeal Jurisdiction: 9113 Citation: QY & QZ v Sydney South West Area Health Service (EOD) [2010] NSWADTAP 48 Date of Decision: 2010-06-29 00:00:00 Before: K P O'Connor DCJ (P); D Patten (DP); B Field File Number(s): ADTAP 109003 Judgment 1THE COURT: We gave judgment in this appeal late last year [2011] NSWCA 412. 2The respondents have filed a notice of motion on 23 December 2011 seeking a further order that they be granted a certificate under the Suitors Fund Act 1951. 3The Court gave directions that the motion be considered on the papers and sought submissions from the parties. 4These submissions showed that there was no opposition to the order being made. 5The order sought is one that ordinarily would be made. 6As was pointed out by Basten JA (with whom Handley JA and McDougall J agreed) in Trust Company of Australia Ltd v Skiwing Pty Ltd [2006] NSWSCA 387; 68 NSWLR 366 at 385 [74] for the purposes of the Suitors Fund Act, the Administrative Decisions Tribunal is classed as a court. 7Accordingly the Court orders that the respondents be granted a certificate under the Suitors Fund Act 1951 in respect of the costs of the appeal including the costs of the motion of 23 December 2011. ************************** DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 05 April 2012