Cameron v Secretary, Department of Human Services (No 2)

Case [2015] FCA 1201


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Cameron v Secretary, Department of Human Services (No 2) [2015] FCA 1201

Citation: Cameron v Secretary, Department of Human Services (No 2) [2015] FCA 1201
Appeal from: Cameron v Secretary, Department of Human Services [2015] AATA 62
Parties: DONALD CAMERON v SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
File number(s): NSD 163 of 2015
Judge(s): YATES J
Date of judgment: 6 November 2015
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for lump sum costs – application granted
Legislation: Federal Court Rules 2011 r 40.02
Cases cited: Cameron v Secretary, Department of Human Services [2015] FCA 875
Nine Films & Television Pty Limited v Ninox Television Limited [2006] FCA 1046
Date of hearing: 6 November 2015
Place: Sydney
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 10
Counsel for the Applicant: The applicant did not appear
Solicitor for the Respondent: Dr S Thompson of Sparke Helmore Lawyers

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

GENERAL DIVISION

NSD 163 of 2015

ON APPEAL FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
BETWEEN:

DONALD CAMERON
Applicant

AND:

SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
Respondent

JUDGE:

YATES J

DATE OF ORDER:

6 NOVEMBER 2015

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.Pursuant to r 40.02(b) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (the Rules), costs be awarded in a lump sum in the amount of $6500.00 instead of any taxed costs, for work up to 19 August 2015.

2.The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of applying for lump sum costs.

3.Pursuant to r 40.02(b) of the Rules, costs be awarded in a lump sum in the amount of $1955.00 instead of any taxed costs, for work since 19 August 2015.

Note:    Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

GENERAL DIVISION

NSD 163 of 2015

ON APPEAL FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
BETWEEN:

DONALD CAMERON
Applicant

AND:

SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
Respondent

JUDGE:

YATES J

DATE:

6 NOVEMBER 2015

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(REVISED FROM TRANSCRIPT)

  1. On 19 August 2015, I dismissed the applicant’s appeal from a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal:  Cameron v Secretary, Department of Human Services [2015] FCA 875. I ordered the applicant to pay the respondent’s costs.

  2. Rule 40.02(2)(b) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 provides that a party or a person who is entitled to costs may apply to the Court for an order that costs be awarded in a lump sum instead of, or in addition to, any taxed costs.  On 8 October 2015, the respondent filed an interlocutory application seeking orders that:

    (a)Costs be awarded in the lump sum of $6,500.00 instead of taxed costs for work up to 19 August 2015;

    (b)The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of applying for lump sum costs; and

    (c)Costs be awarded in a lump sum of $1,500.00 instead of taxed costs for work since 19 August 2015.

  3. I have been informed this morning by Dr Thompson,…

Continue reading Cameron v Secretary, Department of Human Services (No 2)

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Cameron v Secretary, Department of Human Services (No 2) [2015] FCA 1201
Case
[2015] FCA 1201
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Cameron, a job seeker, brought an application against the Secretary of the Department of Human Services in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia seeking a review of a decision to deny a payment under the Newstart Allowance. The Secretary defended the decision on the basis that the applicant was not eligible for the payment. The court was required to determine the appropriate costs to be awarded to the applicant for the legal proceedings.

The court considered the nature of the application and the work required to be done. It took into account the time spent by the applicant's legal representatives and the complexity of the case. The court held that the costs should be awarded in a lump sum rather than taxed costs, as this would be more efficient and less burdensome for the parties. The court also noted that the applicant had not succeeded in their application and therefore the respondent was entitled to their costs for applying for lump sum costs.

The court ordered that the applicant be awarded $6500.00 in lump sum costs for work up to 19 August 2015, and $1955.00 in lump sum costs for work since that date. The applicant was also ordered to pay the respondent's costs of applying for lump sum costs. These orders were made pursuant to rule 40.02(b) of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Pursuant to r 40.02(b) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (the Rules), costs be awarded in a lump sum in the amount of $6500.00 instead of any taxed costs, for work up to 19 August 2015.

2. The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of applying for lump sum costs.

3. Pursuant to r 40.02(b) of the Rules, costs be awarded in a lump sum in the amount of $1955.00 instead of any taxed costs, for work since 19 August 2015.

Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.