BB v Liebsanft

The proceedings between BB and Liebsanft involved a dispute over the costs incurred during a legal action. The applicant, BB, had been unsuccessful in their challenge against the fourth respondent, Liebsanft. Following the judgment against BB, submissions were made regarding the allocation of costs. BB argued that they should only be responsible for their own costs, either under the provisions of section 49 of the Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld) or pursuant to the inherent jurisdiction of the court. Conversely, Liebsanft argued that BB had unreasonably subjected them to the proceedings, thereby warranting an order for costs on an indemnity basis.

The court was required to determine whether the general rule that costs follow the event should apply, or if an alternative order was more appropriate given the circumstances. The court considered the lack of any basis for a review application and the fact that BB had unreasonably initiated the proceedings. The court acknowledged the principle that costs generally follow the event, but also recognised the potential for departing from this rule in cases where a party has acted unreasonably.

In deciding the matter, the court found that BB had unreasonably subjected Liebsanft to the proceedings, which justified an order for costs on an indemnity basis. However, the court also noted that the proceedings had disclosed no basis for a review application, and therefore, the costs should not encompass the entire action. The court ultimately ordered that BB pay Liebsanft's costs of and incidental to the application on the standard basis. This decision balanced the principle of costs following the event with the need to address the unreasonable conduct of BB in initiating the proceedings.