DBC v Director-General, Department of Justice and Attorney-General

The applicant, DBC, was refused a blue card by the Director-General, Department of Justice and Attorney-General (the Department). The refusal was to be reviewed by the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (the Tribunal). The application for review was brought on 18 February 2020. The matter was listed for hearing on 30 September 2020. However, six days before the hearing the Department informed the Tribunal and the applicant that the hearing would not be necessary because the Department had reconsidered its decision and had cancelled the blue card negative notice. The applicant objected to the approach and required the Department to agree to a consent order. The Tribunal decided that the decision under review should be set aside and that the applicant's case was not exceptional requiring issue of a negative notice. The applicant then sought costs of $5,000 against the Department.
The legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant was entitled to costs and if so how they should be assessed. The Tribunal found that the Department’s case was always weak and the applicant was entitled to costs as fixed. The Tribunal noted that had the Department acted earlier, the costs of engaging legal representation for the hearing may have been avoided. The Tribunal decided that the applicant was entitled to costs of $5,000 as fixed. The Tribunal considered that the costs of $5,000 was reasonable given it amounted to just over one third of the solicitor own client costs incurred. The Department must pay the applicant’s costs fixed at $5,000 within 14 days of the date of order.