KHAN v Minister for Immigration

[2017] FCCA 3158

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

KHAN & ORS v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2017] FCCA 3158

Catchwords:
MIGRATION – Costs – in excess of scale amount – additional costs incurred by first respondent in responding to amended application.

First Applicant: FAREED KHAN

Second Applicant: MAJEEDA BEGUM

Third Applicant: MANHA KHAN

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

Second Respondent: ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

File Number: MLG 874 of 2015

Judgment of: Judge McNab

Hearing date: 17 November 2017

Date of Last Submission: 5 December 2017

Delivered at: Melbourne

Delivered on: 14 December 2017

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicants: Mr Cadman

Solicitors for the Applicants: Stirling Law

Counsel for the Respondents: Mr Brown

Solicitors for the Respondents: Sparke Helmore

ORDERS

1. The applicants pay the first respondent’s costs fixed in the sum of $8,206.

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT MELBOURNE

MLG 874 of 2015

FAREED KHAN

First Applicant

MAJEEDA BEGUM

Second Applicant

MANHA KHAN

Third Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

First Respondent

MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The respondent seeks costs in excess of the usual scale figure for costs ($7,206) on the basis that further costs have been incurred by reason of the applicants filing amended grounds of review. It is said that these amended grounds necessitated counsel drafting further submissions and appearing. It seeks costs in the sum of $9,000 which is said to represent 75% of the costs actually incurred by the first respondent.

2. Having considered the outlines of submissions in relation to costs filed on behalf of the first respondent and the applicants, the court is of the view that further costs in excess of those covered by the usual scale of costs allowed for a matter of this kind were incurred in responding to the applicants’ amended application.

3. Having considered those submissions the Court allows a further $1,000 in excess of the scale fee.

I certify that the preceding three (3) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge McNab

Date: 14 December 2017