Fair Work Act 2009_

s.394 - Unfair dismissal

[1] This decision follows the Commission's decision on 4 March 2016 [[2016] FWC 1059] which determined that an order requiring Mr Steven Post (Mr Post or the applicant) to pay NTI Limited's (the respondent) costs on an indemnity basis would be issued.

[2] In accordance with directions issued the respondent has submitted a Bill of Costs and Mr Post's legal representatives have filed submissions detailing a number of objections to items contained within the Bill of Costs. The respondent has provided submissions in reply to these objections.

[3] The Bill of Costs comprises costs for professional services totalling $83,659.40 and disbursements totalling $44,761.91 amounting to the total costs claimed being $128,421.31.

[4] I have considered the submissions made on behalf of Mr Post objecting to various items in the Bill of Costs and have had regard for the Schedule of Costs Prescribed in the Fair Work Regulations 2009 and I have decided that the following amounts will be deducted from the Bill of Costs.

[5] In my view the Bill of Costs includes some instances of duplication which were not necessary, where the costs of a lawyer have been claimed for attending to matters which were also being attended to by a partner for whom costs are separately claimed. The relevant items on the Bill of Costs are numbers 3, 5, 62, 136, 170, 197, 230, 248, 272 and 304. The amounts of these respective items will be deducted from the costs. These add up to a deduction of $4,191.30.

[6] A number of items on the Bill of Costs appear to involve research which in my view is not reasonable in the circumstances of this matter to be claimed as costs. The relevant items on the Bill of Costs are numbers 68, 107, 108, 119, 120 and 128. The amounts of these respective items will be deducted from the costs. These add up to a total deduction of $709.32.

[7] Two items, being numbers 281 and 283 concern amongst other matters the cost of business class airfares from Brisbane to Perth return for two witnesses being Mr Brereton and Mr Sweeney to attend the hearing. I think it is reasonable only to claim the equivalent cost of an economy class airfare in each case. Based on the economy class airfare claimed for the instructing solicitor at item 213 for the same travel a deduction of $2,660 will be made with respect to each of these items. The total to be deducted for the two items then is $5,320.00.

[8] Finally it is not within the scope of my decision to include the cost of preparing the Bill of Costs which was included at item 345. The amount to be deducted for this item is $4,914.00.

[9] The total amount to be deducted from the Bill of Costs is therefore $15,134.62.

[10] This amount will be deducted from the total costs claimed by the respondent of $128,421.31.

[11] Following these deductions the costs to be ordered amount to $113,286.69. I am satisfied that these costs are reasonable and were necessarily incurred in response to Mr Post's unfair dismissal remedy application.

[12] An order for the payment of costs in this amount will now be made.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

var _gaq = _gaq || []; _gaq.push(['_setAccount', 'UA-9592794-1']); _gaq.push(['_trackPageview']); (function() { var ga = document.createElement('script'); ga.type = 'text/javascript'; ga.async = true; ga.src = ('https:' == document.location.protocol ? 'https://ssl' : 'http://www') + '.google-analytics.com/ga.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(ga, s); })();