FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Cleanaway Operations Pty Ltd v Torr [2022] FCA 1172
File number: VID 416 of 2022 Judgment of: MCEVOY J Date of judgment: 30 September 2022 Catchwords: INDUSTRIAL LAW – parties promoted consent orders setting aside decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal which set aside a reviewable decision made by the applicant denying the respondent’s claim for compensation pursuant to s 14 of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) – orders of Tribunal made in error – consent orders made
COSTS – certificate under s 6 of the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth)
Legislation: Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) s 44
Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth) s 6
Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) ss 5A(1), 14
Cases cited: Bradken Limited v Norcast S.ár.L (2013) 219 FCR 101; [2013] FCAFC 123
Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission v May (2016) 257 CLR 468; [2016] HCA 19
Telstra Corporation Limited v Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy (2008) 166 FCR 64; [2008] FCAFC 7
Division: Fair Work Division Registry: Victoria National Practice Area: Employment and Industrial Relations Number of paragraphs: 7 Date of hearing: 30 September 2022 Place: Melbourne Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Clark Solicitor for the Applicant: HWL Ebsworth Lawyers Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Pattenden Solicitor for the Respondent: Maurice Blackburn ORDERS
VID 416 of 2022 BETWEEN: CLEANAWAY OPERATIONS PTY LTD
Applicant
AND: ROBERT TORR
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
MCEVOY J
DATE OF ORDER:
30 SEPTEMBER 2022
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The appeal be allowed.
2.The decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal dated 30 June 2022 be set aside.
3.The matter is remitted to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to make a decision according to law.
4.The respondent pay the applicant’s costs agreed in the sum of $16,910.00.
5.The respondent be granted a costs certificate in respect of the appeal, the certificate to state that, in the opinion of the Court, it would be appropriate for the Attorney-General to authorise a payment under the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth) to the respondent in respect of:
(a)the costs incurred by the respondent in relation to the appeal, and
(b)the costs incurred by the applicant in relation to that appeal ($16,910.00) that are required to be paid by the respondent to the applicant.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
MCEVOY J
The parties to this appeal have promoted, by consent, orders pursuant to which the appeal be allowed, the decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) dated 30 June 2022 be set aside, and the matter be remitted to the Tribunal for determination according to law. The exercise of the power to allow an appeal by consent is dependent upon the identification, to the satisfaction of the Court, of arguable appeallable error in the decision below: see…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Cleanaway Operations Pty Ltd v Torr and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2022] FCA 1172
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Court found that the Tribunal had erred in setting aside Cleanaway's decision, and that the consent orders proposed by the parties were appropriate. The Tribunal had not followed the correct legal principles in reviewing Cleanaway's decision. The Court accepted that the parties had genuinely reached a settlement and that it was in the interests of justice to allow the consent orders. The Court also considered that it was appropriate to grant a costs certificate to the respondent, as the respondent had incurred significant costs in pursuing the appeal. The Court held that the Attorney-General should authorise payment of the respondent's costs, including those incurred by the applicant, under the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth).
The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the Tribunal's decision, and remitted the matter to the Tribunal for a decision according to law. The Court ordered that the respondent pay the applicant's costs in the sum of $16,910.00. Additionally, the Court granted the respondent a costs certificate, allowing the Attorney-General to authorise payment of the respondent's costs, including those incurred by the applicant, in relation to the appeal. This outcome reflects the Court's determination that the Tribunal had erred and that the consent orders were appropriate in the circumstances.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The appeal be allowed.
2. The decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal dated 30 June 2022 be set aside.
3. The matter is remitted to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to make a decision according to law.
4. The respondent pay the applicant’s costs agreed in the sum of $16,910.00.
5. The respondent be granted a costs certificate in respect of the appeal, the certificate to state that, in the opinion of the Court, it would be appropriate for the Attorney-General to authorise a payment under the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth) to the respondent in respect of:
(a) the costs incurred by the respondent in relation to the appeal, and
(b) the costs incurred by the applicant in relation to that appeal ($16,910.00) that are required to be paid by the respondent to the applicant.
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.