Foster v Shaddock

In the case of Foster v Shaddock, the appellant, Foster, sought judicial review of a decision made by the third respondent. Foster was unsuccessful in his application, and subsequently sought to have the costs of the appeal awarded to him under section 49 of the Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld). The central issue before the court was whether the general rule that costs follow the event should be displaced in this instance, given Foster's financial circumstances and the public interest nature of the case.

The court examined the relevant provisions of the Judicial Review Act, particularly section 49, which allows for the awarding of costs under specific circumstances. The court noted that while the general rule is that costs follow the event, there are exceptions under section 49(1)(e) which permit the court to order that a party is to bear only their own costs. This section requires consideration of the financial resources of the applicant, whether the proceeding involves an issue of public interest, and whether the proceeding discloses a reasonable basis for the appeal. The court found that Foster had limited financial resources, and that the appeal involved issues of clear public interest, such as the impact of administrative orders on parole eligibility and the roles of different branches of government.

Based on these findings, the court concluded that each party to the appeal should bear their own costs, as per section 49(1)(e) of the Judicial Review Act. The court emphasised that while the public interest aspect of the case was significant, the statutory provisions regarding costs did not provide a basis for departing from the usual rule in this instance.

Therefore, the final order was that each party to the appeal was to bear their own costs, reflecting the court's consideration of the factors outlined in the Judicial Review Act.