Trad v Jones (No 8)

[2015] NSWCATAD 64

Civil and Administrative Tribunal

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Trad v Jones (No 8). [2015] NSWCATAD 64
Hearing dates:	On papers after 6 March 2015
Decision date:	07 April 2015
Jurisdiction:	Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division
Before:	N Hennessy, LCM Deputy President M Bolt, General Member J Schneeweiss, General Member
Decision:	The Respondents are to pay the Applicant’s costs of these remitted proceedings, apart from the costs thrown away by the adjournment of 11 May 2014, as agreed or, if not agreed, as assessed in accordance with the Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW).
Catchwords:	COSTS – proceedings under Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 remitted from Court of Appeal and re-determined – whether fair to award costs – unreasonable refusal to accept offer of settlement – basis on which matter remitted – orders on remittal substantially the same –fair to award costs
Legislation Cited:	Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997, s 88(1A), s 3 (repealed) Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW), s 20C Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Sch1, cl 6 and 7
Cases Cited:	Fairburn v Cummins [1961] VR 105 Field v Great Northern Railway Co (1878) 3 Ex D 261 Jones Trad [2013] NSWCA 389 Jones and Harbour Radio Pty Limited v Trad [2011] NSWADTAP 19 Jones and Harbour Radio Pty Limited v Trad (No 2) [2011] NSWADTAP 62; Trad v Jones (No. 3) [2013] NSWADTAP 13 Trad v Jones (No 3) [2009] NSWADT 318 Trad v Jones (No 4) [2012] NSWADT 265 Trad v Jones (No 5) [2013] NSWADT 127 Trad v Jones (No 7) [2014] NSWCATAD 225
Category:	Costs
Parties:	Keysar Trad (Applicant) Alan Jones (First Respondent) Harbour Radio Pty Ltd (Second Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel:
File Number(s):	131126

REASONS

Introduction

1. The Applicant, Mr Keysar Trad, has applied for the Respondents, Mr Alan Jones and Harbour Radio Pty Ltd, to pay his costs of the first instance and the remitted proceedings relating to the same complaint of racial vilification under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW). The complaint is about comments Mr Jones made on Radio 2 GB in April 2005.

2. Because an order has been made for the Respondents to pay the Applicant’s costs of the first instance proceedings, the Tribunal has no power to confirm that order or make another costs order in relation to those proceedings.

3. In relation to the proceedings that were remitted by the Court of Appeal, for the reasons we give below, it is fair for the Respondents to pay the Applicant’s costs of those proceedings.

4. The Applicant also applied for the costs of making the costs application. The Respondent applied for the costs of responding to the costs application. Costs have not been awarded in relation to either of those applications.

History

5. The Applicant complained that the Respondents had breached s 20C of the Anti-Discrimination Act which states that:

It is unlawful for a person, by a public act, to incite hatred towards, serious contempt for, or severe ridicule of, a person or group of persons on the ground of the race of…