//
© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.
Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.
[1999] FCA 572
Federal Court of Australia
1999-05-07
Emmett J, Emmett JJ, Kiefel JJ
Original judgment source is linked above.
EMMETT J: 5 As is apparent from the reasons delivered on 1 April 1999, I would not have interfered with the orders made by the trial judge. It was not necessary, therefore, for me to express a view as to the order for costs of the trial which I would have made, had I reached a different conclusion on the substance of the appeal. However, I agree that the respondents ought to have put their submissions on the question of costs, or should have reserved the question of costs, during the hearing of the appeal. I agree that the application to vary the orders of the Court should be refused and that the costs of the application should be costs of the appeal. I certify that the preceding paragraph is a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Emmett.
Associate: Dated: 7 May 1999 Counsel for the Appellant: G.J. McVay
Counsel for the Respondents: C.C. Hodgekiss; M. Richmond
Hanave Pty Ltd
LFOT Pty Ltd