Bunning v Centacare (No.2)

In *Bunning v Centacare (No.2)*, Vasta J of the Supreme Court of Western Australia considered an application for costs following a determination that the applicant had been wholly unsuccessful in their proceedings. The dispute concerned the assessment of costs in a matter where the applicant's claims had been dismissed.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the applicant, having been unsuccessful in all aspects of their case, should be ordered to pay the costs of the respondent. This involved an assessment of the general rule regarding costs in litigation and any exceptions that might apply in this specific context.

Vasta J applied the general principle that costs follow the event, meaning the unsuccessful party typically bears the costs of the successful party. The Court found no exceptional circumstances to deviate from this rule, and therefore, the applicant was ordered to pay the costs of the respondent.