Queensland Judgments
Authorised Reports & Unreported Judgments
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
  • Unreported Judgment

MDF v Mental Health Review Tribunal (No 2)[2021] QSC 36

MDF v Mental Health Review Tribunal (No 2)[2021] QSC 36

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

MDF v Mental Health Review Tribunal (No 2) [2021] QSC 36  

PARTIES:

MDF

(applicant)

v

MENTAL HEALTH REVIEW TRIBUNAL

(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

SC No 744 of 2020

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court

DELIVERED ON:

3 March 2021

DELIVERED AT:

Maryborough

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

JUDGE:

Crow J

ORDER:

  1. The applicant pay the respondent’s costs on a standard basis.

CATCHWORDS:

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – JUDICIAL REVIEW – PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE – COSTS – where the applicant was wholly unsuccessful in their application for judicial review – where the respondent, following the general rule, seeks their costs – whether costs ought to follow the event

Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld), s 50  
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 681

COUNSEL:

The applicant appeared on their own behalf

B Cramer (sol) for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

The applicant appeared on their own behalf

Crown Law for the respondent

  1. [1]
    On 4 February 2021, I dismissed the application filed on 22 July 2020 and invited submissions upon costs. The submissions have been filed and served.
  2. [2]
    The successful respondent sought its costs under r 681 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) (“UCPR”).
  3. [3]
    The applicant has filed written submissions which argue, inter alia, that because the respondent has not made an application that addresses the requirements in Part 6 of the Judicial Review Act 1999 (Qld) (“Judicial Review Act”), it is not appropriate to require the applicant to make general submissions about costs because the grounds for a costs application in the Judicial Review Act are narrower than the grounds that apply generally to applications under the UCPR
  4. [4]
    Despite stating he is not making submissions on costs, the applicant submits:

“…In this matter the claims to public interest immunity by the Respondent and the Attorney General are largely inconsistent with the patria potestas with respect to the mentally ill by the executive government as parens patrie – Patria potestas in pietate debet, non in atrocitate, consistere. There are a number of other submissions that could be made regarding the importance of this matter, however until an application for costs that complies with Part 6 of the Judicial Review Act is filed and served, there is no utility in making these submissions…”

  1. [5]
    The respondent seeks its costs pursuant to r 681 as it argues that s 50 of the Judicial Review Act does not apply. I do not accept that position. Although it is difficult to classify the application brought by MDF by its repetitive references to sections in Part 4 of the Act,  it leads me to conclude that the application was, within the meaning of s 50 of the Judicial Review Act, brought under Part 4 of the Act. In those circumstances, a costs order can only be made against the applicant by the respondent in the circumstances where the applicant was wholly unsuccessful in obtaining relief, and one of the matters in s 50(b)(ii) are satisfied. As recorded above, the applicant has been wholly unsuccessful in obtaining the relief sought. Furthermore, as set out in MDF v Mental Health Review Tribunal [2021] QSC 8, the application did not disclose a reasonable basis.
  2. [6]
    In those circumstances, I order the applicant to pay the respondent’s standard costs of and incidental to the application.
Close

Editorial Notes

  • Published Case Name:

    MDF v Mental Health Review Tribunal (No 2)

  • Shortened Case Name:

    MDF v Mental Health Review Tribunal (No 2)

  • MNC:

    [2021] QSC 36

  • Court:

    QSC

  • Judge(s):

    Crow J

  • Date:

    03 Mar 2021

Appeal Status

Please note, appeal data is presently unavailable for this judgment. This judgment may have been the subject of an appeal.
Help

Require Technical Assistance?

Message sent!

Thanks for reaching out! Someone from our team will get back to you soon.

Message not sent!

Something went wrong. Please try again.