Corica v The Shire of Mundaring

Case

[2016] WASC 356 (S)

30 JANUARY 2017

No judgment structure available for this case.

CORICA -v- THE SHIRE OF MUNDARING [2016] WASC 356 (S)



SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIACitation No:[2016] WASC 356 (S)
Case No:SJA:1017/20157 NOVEMBER 2016
Coram:TOTTLE J30/01/17
3Judgment Part:1 of 1
Result: The appellants pay the respondent's costs, to be taxed if not agreed
B
PDF Version
Parties:MARILYN KAYE CORICA
SALVATORE CORICA
THE SHIRE OF MUNDARING

Catchwords:

Practice and procedure
Costs
Where appellants' application was wholly unsuccessful
Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Nil

Case References:

Nil

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
    IN CHAMBERS
CITATION : CORICA -v- THE SHIRE OF MUNDARING [2016] WASC 356 (S) CORAM : TOTTLE J HEARD : 7 NOVEMBER 2016 DELIVERED : 30 JANUARY 2017 FILE NO/S : SJA 1017 of 2015 BETWEEN : MARILYN KAYE CORICA
    SALVATORE CORICA
    Appellants

    AND

    THE SHIRE OF MUNDARING
    Respondent


ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : MAGISTRATE MIGNACCA-RANDAZZO

File No : MI 5376 of 2013, MI 5377 of 2013, MI 5378 of 2013, MI 5379 of 2013, MI 5380 of 2013, MI 5381 of 2013, MI 11570 of 2013, MI 11571 of 2013, MI 224 of 2014, MI 225 of 2014, MI 226 of 2014, MI 227 of 2015


Catchwords:

Practice and procedure - Costs - Where appellants' application was wholly unsuccessful - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Nil

Result:

The appellants pay the respondent's costs, to be taxed if not agreed


Category: B


Representation:

Counsel:


    Appellants : In person
    Respondent : Mr A Wadham

Solicitors:

    Appellants : In person
    Respondent : McLeods Barristers & Solicitors



Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Nil


1 TOTTLE J: On 7 November 2016 I dismissed the appellants' application for leave to appeal against convictions that had been entered against them in the Magistrates Court.

2 The respondent applied for an order that the appellants pay its costs of the application for leave to appeal. The appellants opposed this order and I gave them leave to file and serve written submissions to enable them to develop their argument that they should not be liable for the respondent's costs, and I gave the respondent leave to file responsive submissions. I said that upon receipt of those submissions I would determine the issue of costs 'on the papers'.

3 On 21 November 2016 the appellants filed submissions extending over some 16 pages. The submissions challenged the standing of the respondents to bring the proceedings and repeated a number of arguments that had been advanced by the appellants in their application for leave to appeal. The submissions concluded with a list of the 'orders sought' by the appellants. These included orders that:


    the 'Company's [sic] known as be deregistered immediately:

    1 Attorney General ABN 70 598 519 443

    2 Supreme Court of Western Australia ABN 70 598 519 443


4 The deregistration of a number of other entities was sought.

5 Under the heading 'Costs' the appellants sought payment of the sum of $2 million to each of them as compensation for hardship suffered by them.

6 The submissions did not contain a cogent reasoned argument as to why the appellants should not pay the respondents' costs of the application for leave to appeal.

7 The appellants' application was wholly unsuccessful and there is no reason why they should not pay the respondents' costs. Accordingly, I order that the appellants pay the respondents' costs of the application for leave to appeal, such costs to be taxed.

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

1

Statutory Material Cited

1