FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Revill v John Holland Group Pty Ltd (No 3) [2021] FCA 1403
File number: WAD 403 of 2019 Judgment of: JACKSON J Date of judgment: 12 November 2021 Catchwords: COSTS - whether discretion to award costs under s 570(2)(a) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) enlivened - proceeding instituted without reasonable cause - costs awarded Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) ss 50, 53, 550, 570
Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 31A
Insurance Contracts Act 1986 (Cth) s 48
Cases cited: Alexander v Cambridge Credit Corp Ltd (1985) 2 NSWLR 685
Australian Workers' Union v Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd (No 2) [2013] FCAFC 23; (2013) 232 FCR 428
Baker v Patrick Projects Pty Ltd (No 2) [2014] FCAFC 166; (2014) 145 ALD 548
Kanan v Australian Postal & Telecommunications Union (1992) 43 IR 257
Revill v John Holland Group Pty Ltd (No 2) [2021] FCA 1056
Division: General Division Registry: Western Australia National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights Number of paragraphs: 24 Date of hearing: 10 November 2021 Counsel for the Applicant: Mr D Mezger Solicitor for the Applicant: Chapmans Barristers & Solicitors Counsel for the Respondent: Mr M Follett Solicitor for the Respondent: KHQ Lawyers ORDERS
WAD 403 of 2019 BETWEEN: RAYMOND ANDREW REVILL
Applicant
AND: JOHN HOLLAND GROUP PTY LTD
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
JACKSON J
DATE OF ORDER:
12 NOVEMBER 2021
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The applicant must pay the respondent's costs of the proceeding, for the avoidance of doubt:
(a)including the costs of and incidental to the applicant's interlocutory application dated 17 July 2020; and
(b)excluding the costs in respect of the respondent's interlocutory application dated 3 July 2020.
2.The amount of costs to be paid is referred to a registrar to be assessed.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
JACKSON J:
In 2020 I dismissed an application by Mr Revill for the joinder to this proceeding of two companies associated with the respondent, John Holland Group Pty Ltd (JH Group): Revill v John Holland Group Pty Ltd [2020] FCA 1633 (Revill (No 1)). In September of this year I dismissed the entire proceeding under s 31A(2) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth): Revill v John Holland Group Pty Ltd (No 2) [2021] FCA 1056 (Revill (No 2)). In summary, those decisions were made because I found that there was no reasonable prospect that Mr Revill would establish that the respondent was liable in respect of any of the causes of action he pursued, and those causes of action were time barred against the two companies which the applicant sought to join as respondents, namely John Holland Pty Ltd (JHPL) and JHG Mutual Pty Ltd (JHG…
Continue reading Revill v John Holland Group Pty Ltd (No 3)
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Revill v John Holland Group Pty Ltd (No 3) [2021] FCA 1403
- Case
- [2021] FCA 1403
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court included whether the court had the discretion to award costs under section 570(2)(a) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), and whether the proceeding was instituted without reasonable cause. The court needed to determine if the applicant's claims were frivolous or vexatious and if the applicant had a genuine prospect of success.
The court found that the applicant's claims were without reasonable cause and were frivolous or vexatious. The court concluded that the applicant's case was not supported by credible evidence and lacked a genuine prospect of success. The court exercised its discretion to award costs under section 570(2)(a) of the Fair Work Act, ordering that the applicant must pay the respondent's costs of the proceeding, excluding the costs of the respondent's interlocutory application dated 3 July 2020. The amount of costs to be paid was referred to a registrar to be assessed.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The applicant must pay the respondent's costs of the proceeding, for the avoidance of doubt:
(a) including the costs of and incidental to the applicant's interlocutory application dated 17 July 2020; and
(b) excluding the costs in respect of the respondent's interlocutory application dated 3 July 2020.
2. The amount of costs to be paid is referred to a registrar to be assessed.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.