Oshlack v Rous Water (No 2)

In the Federal Court of Australia, Oshlack sought a declaration that he was entitled to a pension based on his former employment with Rous Water. The matter was heard in the Federal Circuit Court, where it was dismissed, and the applicant appealed to the Federal Court. The appeal raised several issues, including whether the applicant was entitled to a declaration, whether he was entitled to a pension, and whether he was entitled to costs. The court found that the applicant was not entitled to a declaration as there was no subsisting contract for the payment of a pension. The court also found that the applicant was not entitled to a pension as the relevant statutory provisions did not apply to his circumstances. The court held that the applicant was not entitled to costs, but if any party sought an alternative costs order, the matter would be relisted for further argument on the question of costs. The summons was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to pay the costs of the first and second respondents.