Shankar v The Uniting Church in Australia; Shankar v Domino's Pizza Enterprises Limited (No 2)

The Shankar v The Uniting Church in Australia; Shankar v Domino's Pizza Enterprises Limited (No 2) case involved the plaintiff, Mr Shankar, who pursued legal action against two defendants: The Uniting Church in Australia and Domino's Pizza Enterprises Limited. The primary dispute centered on issues related to defamation and the publication of false and misleading statements that harmed Mr Shankar's reputation. The case was heard in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The court had to determine several key legal issues. Firstly, it needed to ascertain whether the statements made by the defendants were indeed defamatory and whether they had caused harm to Mr Shankar's reputation. Secondly, the court had to decide the appropriate costs order to be made in light of the plaintiff's partial success against one of the defendants. The court needed to weigh the principles of the Bullock order, which typically awards costs in the band of success, against the Sanderson order, which allows for a more equitable allocation of costs.

The court concluded that the statements made by the defendants were defamatory and had indeed caused harm to Mr Shankar's reputation. However, the court determined that the appropriate costs order in this instance was the Sanderson order. This decision was based on the fact that the plaintiff had achieved a significant victory against one defendant while not being successful against the other. The court found that a Sanderson order would ensure a more equitable allocation of costs, reflecting the partial nature of the plaintiff's success.

The court ordered that the costs of the proceeding be allocated in accordance with the Sanderson order, recognising the plaintiff's partial success and the need for a fair and equitable distribution of costs between the parties involved.