Tucker v McKee

The appeal in Tucker v McKee was brought before the court by Mr. Tucker against the State parties. The dispute centres on the order for security for costs made by the Registrar in relation to Mr. Tucker’s appeal against the dismissal of his defamation proceeding. The State parties sought an order for additional security for costs, which Mr. Tucker opposed on the basis that the amount should not exceed $5,985, citing the special costs regime under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The primary legal issue before the court was the appropriate amount of security for costs to be ordered, considering the broad brush assessment of future costs and the principles guiding such assessments. The court was required to decide whether the order for security in the amount of $28,490, as initially determined by the Registrar, was sufficient or if additional security should be ordered.

The court considered the principles for assessing the quantum of security for costs, which involve a broad brush assessment rather than a detailed taxation of costs. It noted that the court's task is to identify an amount that is broadly reasonable rather than an exact assessment. The court found that the Registrar's approach in determining the amount of security for costs was appropriate, and thus upheld the order for security in the amount of $28,490. However, given the additional security requested by the State parties, the court ordered an additional amount of $7,632, bringing the total security for costs to $36,122. The court also ordered that if Mr. Tucker fails to pay the security amount within the specified time, his appeal will be stayed. Finally, unless Mr. Tucker files short written submissions opposing the order within seven days, he will be ordered to pay the State parties’ costs of and incidental to the review application and the application for additional security for costs.