Queensland Construction Materials P/L v Redland City Council & Ors

(2010) 175 LGERA 153; [2010] QCA 248

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › Departing from the general rule
4. › Mixed success
5. › Apportionment of costs in appeals
6. › Whether no order as to costs appropriate where each party had measure of success and failure
7. › Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 766(1)(d)
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › Public interest litigation
4. › Whether unsuccessful applicant should bear costs where litigation raised issues of public interest
5. › Whether applicant stood to gain personally
6. › Oshlack v Richmond River Council (1998) 193 CLR 72 applied
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Judgments and orders
3. › Amendment of orders
4. › Slip rule
5. › Whether declaration should be amended to reflect intended scope
6. › Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 388

Quick Take

Where an appeal involves mixed success and the unsuccessful issues raised questions of significant public interest, the court may order no costs rather than apportioning costs by issue. A party who persists in resisting an appeal despite an incurable defect in its application may be denied costs on issues where it succeeded. The Oshlack principles apply to protect public interest litigants in planning and native title disputes from adverse costs orders where they did not stand to gain personally.