Goodwin v O'Driscoll

In the case of Goodwin v O'Driscoll, the respondent, Bruce Goodwin, appealed against a decision of the District Court of Queensland that had ordered him to pay the applicant's costs of appeal. The applicant, Gerard James Murphy, had filed an application seeking to set aside the order for costs and to have the respondent pay his costs of and incidental to the appeal. The legal issues that the Court of Appeal had to decide were whether a transitional provision applied to the amendment of the costs rules and whether an order should be made fixing costs under the new rules.

The Court of Appeal held that the transitional provision did apply to the amendment of the costs rules, and that the order for costs made on 2 April 2007 should be set aside. The Court further held that the respondent should pay the applicant's costs of and incidental to the appeal fixed in the sum of $8,000. The Court did not make any order as to the costs of the application filed on 5 December 2007. The Court of Appeal found that the transitional provision applied to the amendment of the costs rules, and that the order for costs made on 2 April 2007 should be set aside. The Court further found that the respondent should pay the applicant's costs of and incidental to the appeal fixed in the sum of $8,000. The Court did not make any order as to the costs of the application filed on 5 December 2007.