Director of Proceedings on behalf of the Health Ombudsman v XD [No 2] Summary

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Director of Proceedings on behalf of the Health Ombudsman v XD [No 2] [2024] QCA 258

PARTIES:

DIRECTOR OF PROCEEDINGS ON BEHALF OF THE HEALTH OMBUDSMAN
(applicant)
v
XD
(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

Appeal No 12814 of 2023
QCAT No 121 of 2020
QCAT No 288 of 2021

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Application for Leave Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act – Further Order

ORIGINATING COURT:

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal – [2023] QCAT 340 (Judicial Member Dick SC)

DELIVERED ON:

17 December 2024

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

JUDGES:

Dalton JA and Fraser AJA and Brown J

ORDER:

No order as to costs.

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – COSTS – where the appellant had mixed success in the substantive appeal – where, as a result, the parties agreed in their written submissions that there should be no order as to costs – whether the court should make no order as to costs

COUNSEL:

J R Hunter KC, with S J Cartledge, for the applicant
G W Diehm KC, with C D Templeton, for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Office of the Health Ombudsman for the applicant
K&L Gates for the respondent

THE COURT: The Court delivered its judgment in the appeal in this matter on 8 November 2024. In relation to costs, the Court ordered:
“5.If the parties intend that there should be any costs order other than that costs follow the event, they should file written submissions on costs not exceeding five pages, the respondent within seven days of the date of delivery of this judgment, and the appellant within seven days thereafter.
6.Otherwise, costs follow the event.”
Both parties provided short written submissions as to costs. The respondent submitted that there should be no order as to costs. The appellant agreed that there should be no order as to costs. In light of the parties’ position, it is therefore appropriate that the Court make no order as to costs.
The order of the Court is that there be no order as to costs.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Director of Proceedings on behalf of the Health Ombudsman v XD [No 2] involves the appellant, the Director of Proceedings on behalf of the Health Ombudsman, and the respondent, XD. The dispute pertains to the costs associated with civil proceedings in state and territory courts. The appellant had mixed success in the substantive appeal, leading to an agreement between the parties, as reflected in their written submissions, that there should be no order as to costs. The court was tasked with deciding whether it should make an order regarding the costs despite the parties' agreement.

The legal issue before the court was whether it should proceed with making an order as to costs when the parties had already reached a consensus in their submissions that such an order should not be made. The court had to consider the precedents and principles governing costs orders in civil proceedings, particularly in situations where the parties have mutually agreed on the allocation or non-allocation of costs. The court needed to balance the principles of fairness and the practicalities of judicial resources against the expressed wishes of the parties.

In reaching its decision, the court noted the established practice of courts respecting the parties' agreements on costs unless there are compelling reasons to do otherwise. The court found that in this instance, there were no such reasons to deviate from the parties' agreement. The court recognised that the parties had thoroughly considered the matter and had come to a mutual decision, which was reflective of the practicalities and fairness of the situation. Accordingly, the court decided that it should not make an order as to costs, aligning with the parties' agreement.

The final order of the court was to make no order as to costs, in accordance with the agreement reached by the parties. This decision underscores the importance of respecting the parties' agreements on procedural matters such as costs, unless there are exceptional circumstances that warrant judicial intervention.

Director of Proceedings on behalf of the Health Ombudsman v XD [No 2]

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

CITATION:	Director of Proceedings on behalf of the Health Ombudsman v XD [No 2] [2024] QCA 258
PARTIES:	DIRECTOR OF PROCEEDINGS ON BEHALF OF THE HEALTH OMBUDSMAN (applicant) v XD (respondent)
FILE NO/S:	Appeal No 12814 of 2023 QCAT No 121 of 2020 QCAT No 288 of 2021
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Application for Leave Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act – Further Order
ORIGINATING COURT:	Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal – [2023] QCAT 340 (Judicial Member Dick SC)
DELIVERED ON:	17 December 2024
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	On the papers
JUDGES:	Dalton JA and Fraser AJA and Brown J
ORDER:	No order as to costs.
CATCHWORDS:	PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – COSTS – where the appellant had mixed success in the substantive appeal – where, as a result, the parties agreed in their written submissions that there should be no order as to costs – whether the court should make no order as to costs
COUNSEL:	J R Hunter KC, with S J Cartledge, for the applicant G W Diehm KC, with C D Templeton, for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Office of the Health Ombudsman for the applicant K&L Gates for the respondent