Zie v Shaoji

The matter of Zie v Shaoji involved proceedings where the plaintiff sought an order for costs against the defendant. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The dispute centred on whether the Attorney General was entitled to intervene in the proceedings as an intervener and, if so, whether the plaintiff was entitled to costs from the Attorney General.

The court was required to determine whether the Attorney General had the right to intervene and, if so, whether the plaintiff's application for costs should be granted. The plaintiff argued that the Attorney General's failure to provide particulars and information concerning a conditional appearance warranted an order for costs. The court had to weigh the plaintiff's arguments against the obligation of the Commonwealth to act as a model litigant and consider any potential criticism of the Attorney General's conduct.

The court found that while the Attorney General had the right to intervene, there was no basis to criticise the conduct of the Attorney General as a litigant. The court noted that the failure to provide particulars and information concerning the conditional appearance was not a basis for an order of costs. Consequently, the court limited the leave for the plaintiff to proceed with their application for costs against the Attorney General. The court did not make any order as to costs in this matter.