Croker v Department of Education and Training (NSW) (No. 2)

[2009] FCA 351

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Croker v Department of Education and Training (NSW) (No. 2) [2009] FCA 351

CLAYTON ROBERT CROKER v DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING (NSW)

NSD 2 of 2009

EMMETT J

1 APRIL 2009

SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 2 of 2009

BETWEEN: CLAYTON ROBERT CROKER
Applicant

AND: DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING (NSW)
Respondent

JUDGE:	EMMETT J
DATE OF ORDER:	1 APRIL 2009
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The Applicant pay the Respondent’s cost in the amount of $9,500

Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

The text of entered orders can be located using eSearch on the Court’s website.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 2 of 2009

BETWEEN:	CLAYTON ROBERT CROKER Applicant
AND:	DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING (NSW) Respondent
JUDGE:	EMMETT J
DATE:	1 APRIL 2009
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. On the last occasion I ordered that this proceeding be dismissed.  The respondent, the State of New South Wales (the State), asks for an order for costs in a lump sum.  The reason for that request is that the applicant has a significant history of unsuccessful litigation and the State is concerned that preparing a bill for taxation would incur further unnecessary costs and expense.  The evidence before me indicates that the applicant has previously been a party to proceedings in which in 67 instances he has had judgment entered against him or has had an appeal or claim dismissed.  Fifty three costs orders have been made against the applicant.  As I indicated on the last occasion, this proceeding had no possible prospect of success. 

2. Mr Robert Horton, a partner of the solicitor for the respondent, has deposed to the costs that have been incurred in relation to this proceeding.  Mr Horton’s evidence indicates that the total costs that have incurred by the State, which are referable to the proceeding, amount to $16,019.  As a general rule, a properly prepared solicitor/client bill of costs would result in party/party costs of between 60 per cent and two thirds of the solicitor/client bill.  The State asks for an order for costs in the sum of $9,500.  In all of the circumstances, I consider that it is in the interest of justice to make an order to that effect. 

I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Emmett.

Associate:

Dated:       15 April 2009

Counsel for the Respondent:	R Pepper
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Hicksons

Date of Hearing:	1 April 2009
Date of Judgment:	1 April 2009