Dowling v John Fairfax Publications Pty Limited (No.5)
[2008] FMCA 1174
•15 August 2008
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| DOWLING v JOHN FAIRFAX PUBLICATIONS PTY LIMITED (No.5) | [2008] FMCA 1174 |
| INDUSTRIAL LAW – COSTS – Quantification. |
| Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001, r.21.15 |
| Applicant: | SHANE DOWLING |
| Respondent: | JOHN FAIRFAX PUBLICATIONS PTY LIMITED |
| File Number: | SYG 2671 of 2007 |
| Judgment of: | Cameron FM |
| Hearing dates: | 28 July 2008 & 15 August 2008 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 15 August 2008 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 15 August 2008 |
REPRESENTATION
| The Applicant appeared in person |
| Counsel for the Respondent: | Ms K. Eastman |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Freehills |
ORDERS
The applicant pay the respondent’s costs fixed in the amount of $7,254.43.
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SYG 2671 of 2007
| SHANE DOWLING |
Applicant
And
| JOHN FAIRFAX PUBLICATIONS PTY LIMITED |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
On 26 June 2008 I ordered that these proceedings be dismissed. On 28 July 2008 I ordered that the applicant pay the respondent’s costs of and incidental to his application in a case filed on 30 October 2007 and one-third of the remainder of the respondent’s costs up to and including 20 December 2007, those costs to be assessed according to the Court’s scale of costs.
The respondent was directed to file an assessment of its costs on or before 29 July 2008 and the applicant was directed to advise on or before 4 August 2008 whether he consented to the respondent’s quantification of its costs or required the matter be relisted for argument. The respondent has filed its proposed quantification of its costs but the applicant has neither consented to that quantification nor requested that the matter be relisted for argument. Mr Dowling was invited today to advise the Court whether there was any omission in this conduct and he indicated that there was not.
Costs are to be assessed according to the scale of costs found in pt.1 of Sch.1 to the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001. The relevant costs are those under the heading “General federal law amount”. Employing that scale, I assess the respondent’s costs entitlement as follows.
The respondent is entitled to costs for the following stages identified in the Court’s costs schedule:
(a)
Stage 1
Initiating or opposing application up to completion of first court date
$2005
(b)
Stage 2
“Interim or summary hearing – as a discrete event” - applicant’s notice of motion
$1250
(c)
Stage 2
“Interim or summary hearing – as a discrete event” - respondent’s application in a case
$1250
(d)
Stage 2
“Interim or summary hearing – as a discrete event” - applicant’s application in a case
$1250
Given the complexity of the matters canvassed in these proceedings, pursuant to r.21.15 I certify that it was reasonable for the respondent to employ an advocate.
As to time spent in court, the respondent is entitled to costs based on the following amounts:
(a)
24 Jul 2007
directions hearing
$205
(b)
20 Aug 2007
hearing of respondent’s notice of motion in the Federal Court, half day allowed.
$750 for counsel plus
$375 advocacy loading plus
$750 for instructing solicitor
(c)
28 Sep 2007
directions hearing
$205
(d)
25 Oct 2007
full day hearing of respondent’s application in a case.
$1500 for counsel plus
$750 advocacy loading plus
$1500 for instructing solicitor
(e)
7 Nov 2007
hearing of the applicant’s application in a case filed on 30 October 2007, assessed as a half day hearing
$750 plus
$375 advocacy loading
(f)
20 Dec 2007
taking judgment
$205
The respondent has also identified photocopying, filing fees, transcript charges and postage charges as disbursements totalling $3,278.30, which I will allow.
Of these figures, the disbursements and the amounts set out in paragraphs 4(a)-(c), 6(a)-(d) and 6(f) above must be reduced by two-thirds giving a total amount of $4,674.43. The costs in relation to the application in a case filed on 30 October 2007 total $2,375.00.
To these figures will be added $205 for taking judgment today.
Consequently, I assess the costs which the applicant must pay the respondent to be $7,254.43.
I certify that the preceding ten (10) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Cameron FM
Associate:
Date: 21 August 2008
0
0
1