Pham v Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal (No 2)

In the case of Pham v Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal, the appellant sought a review of the tribunal's decision to award costs against him. The dispute arose from proceedings before the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT), where the appellant had been unsuccessful. The matter was subsequently heard by the Court of Appeal. The central issue before the court was whether the circumstances justified an order for costs against the respondent tribunal. The court also considered whether costs should be awarded against the Attorney-General, who had intervened in the original proceedings in VCAT and was treated as an intervener on appeal.

The court examined the principle that a tribunal should not make a costs order unless the circumstances are exceptional. It noted that the tribunal had made an order for costs against the appellant based on the ground of frivolity. The court found that this was not a ground sufficient to warrant a costs order. The court held that the tribunal's decision to award costs against the appellant was not justified by the circumstances of the case. In relation to the Attorney-General's intervention, the court held that as the Attorney-General was not a party to the original proceedings, costs incurred as a result of their intervention could not be awarded against them. The court further noted that the provisions of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 did not support an award of costs against the Attorney-General.

The court ordered that the costs of the appeal be paid by the respondents and that the costs order made by VCAT against the appellant be set aside. The court also held that no costs should be awarded against the Attorney-General for their intervention in the proceedings. The final orders of the court reflected these determinations, providing relief to the appellant on the costs issues while affirming the principles governing costs orders and interveners in administrative tribunal proceedings.