Gloucester Shire Council v Fitch Ratings, Inc (No 3)

Gloucester Shire Council was involved in a dispute with Fitch Ratings, Inc concerning the costs associated with various court applications and amendments to pleadings. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The central issue before the court was whether the applicants, Gloucester Shire Council, should pay the respondents' costs due to the amendment of their pleadings, and whether the respondents acted unreasonably in opposing the amendment application.

The court found that the applicants had conceded that they should pay the respondents' costs "thrown away" by the amendment to their pleadings. The applicants had also conceded that the respondents were entitled to costs associated with the respondents' amended interlocutory application and the applicants' interlocutory applications. The court accepted these concessions and determined that the costs should follow the event. The court also found that the respondents did not act unreasonably in opposing the amendment application, as the application sought an indulgence from the Court.

As a result, the court ordered that the applicants pay the respondents' costs thrown away as a result of the amendment to the pleadings. Additionally, the court ordered that the costs of and associated with the respondents' amended interlocutory application and the applicants' interlocutory applications be the respondents' costs in the cause. The entry of these orders is governed by Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.