Zaiter v Ruddock (No 2)

The case of Zaiter v Ruddock (No 2) involved two parties, Zaiter and Ruddock, in a dispute that reached the court. Zaiter sought to challenge certain actions taken by Ruddock, and the case revolved around the issue of costs in legal proceedings, particularly whether the construction of a major political party’s constitution should be considered public interest litigation.

The central legal issues before the court included the general rule that costs follow the event, which generally means that the losing party in a legal action must pay the winning party's costs. A specific point of contention was the extent to which these costs should be borne by the parties up to the entry of submitting appearance. The court also had to consider whether the construction of a major political party’s constitution, as part of the proceedings, qualified as public interest litigation, which could potentially alter the usual cost-bearing rules.

The court's reasoning focused on the application of the general rule of costs following the event. It examined the circumstances surrounding the entry of submitting appearance and whether any special considerations applied due to the nature of the litigation as public interest. The court concluded that the proceedings did not meet the criteria for public interest litigation, thus adhering to the general rule. Consequently, the court determined that the costs incurred by the parties up to the entry of submitting appearance should be borne by the respective parties.

The final orders of the court upheld the general rule of costs following the event and ruled that the construction of the political party’s constitution did not qualify as public interest litigation. The parties were to bear their own costs up to the point of submitting appearance.