Grant v Secretary of Department of Home Affairs

In the case of Grant v Secretary of Department of Home Affairs, the applicant, a non-citizen, sought a writ of mandamus, an injunction, and a change in the location of his detention. The applicant's case was rendered moot when the Minister granted him a visa following the final hearing but before the judgment was delivered. The central issue for the Court was whether it should exercise its discretion to award costs given that the application was not determined on its merits.

The Court noted that while the usual rule is that costs follow the event, this principle does not cover scenarios where the application is not determined. The Court emphasised that it has a broad discretion in awarding costs under section 43(2) of the Federal Court of Australia Act. The Court found that it was appropriate to award costs in this case as the applicant would likely have been substantially successful had the application not been rendered moot. The Court observed that the applicant had acted reasonably and the decision in Lai Qin was distinguishable as the present case involved a completed hearing and advanced judgment preparation.

The Court ultimately concluded that to determine the applicant was likely to be substantially successful did not involve making an impermissible prediction about the outcome of a hypothetical case. Given the circumstances, the Court exercised its discretion to order the respondent to pay the applicant's costs.

ORDERS:
1. The Respondent pay the Applicant’s costs.