LCK v Health Ombudsman (No 2)

The applicant, LCK, sought judicial review of a decision made by the Health Ombudsman, the respondent. The dispute centred around the revocation of an immediate registration action against the applicant. The matter was heard by the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT). The applicant argued that the Ombudsman's decision to revoke the immediate registration action was unjust and sought a review of the decision. The primary legal issue before the tribunal was whether the interests of justice required an order for costs to be paid by the respondent to the applicant. This required consideration of the principles of costs in administrative law and relevant statutory provisions.

The tribunal considered the principles of costs in administrative law, particularly the approach to costs orders when a decision under review is revoked before the hearing. The tribunal referenced previous cases, such as Colagrande v Health Ombudsman and Marzini v Health Ombudsman (No. 4), which established that the interests of justice may require an order for costs in certain circumstances. The tribunal also considered the statutory provisions in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, particularly sections 100 and 102. Ultimately, the tribunal found that the interests of justice did require an order for costs to be made in favour of the applicant.

In light of the above, the tribunal ordered that the respondent pay the applicant's costs of and incidental to the proceeding. The costs were to be assessed on a standard basis on the District Court scale, and if not agreed upon by the parties, an approved costs assessor would be appointed by the tribunal. The costs were to be paid within twenty-eight days of the ascertainment of the amount by assessment or agreement. This decision provides guidance on the approach to costs orders in administrative law cases where the decision under review is revoked before the hearing.