❓ Hon Nick Goiran questions the Premier regarding the costs associated with the defamation case between the Premier and Mr. Palmer. The Leader of the House declines to answer, citing standing orders.
AnsweredQoN 739Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
ATTORNEY GENERAL — STATE LEGAL CASES —
COSTS
739. Hon NICK GOIRAN to the Leader of the House representing
the Premier:
I refer to the Attorney General's
unreliable answer on 18 August 2022 to a question without notice asked on 11 August
2022.
(1) Is it the
case that the Premier was found to have defamed Mr Palmer and he must bear the
costs of his unsuccessful defence?
(2) What were the
costs of his unsuccessful defence?
(3) Is it the
case that Mr Palmer was found to have defamed the Premier and that he must pay
the costs of the Premier's
successful cross-claim but only on a party-and-party basis from 11.00 am on 22 December 2021?
(4) What were the
costs of the Premier's cross-claim up to 11.00 am on 22 December 2021?
(5) Has a bill of
costs been prepared and sent to Mr Palmer for the ordered costs of the
cross-claim?
COSTS
739. Hon NICK GOIRAN to the Leader of the House representing
the Premier:
I refer to the Attorney General's
unreliable answer on 18 August 2022 to a question without notice asked on 11 August
2022.
(1) Is it the
case that the Premier was found to have defamed Mr Palmer and he must bear the
costs of his unsuccessful defence?
(2) What were the
costs of his unsuccessful defence?
(3) Is it the
case that Mr Palmer was found to have defamed the Premier and that he must pay
the costs of the Premier's
successful cross-claim but only on a party-and-party basis from 11.00 am on 22 December 2021?
(4) What were the
costs of the Premier's cross-claim up to 11.00 am on 22 December 2021?
(5) Has a bill of
costs been prepared and sent to Mr Palmer for the ordered costs of the
cross-claim?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the
honourable member for some notice of the question.
(1)–(5) The
premise of the member's question is incorrect and I refer him to
standing order 105(1)(b), which states that questions shall ''not seek
an opinion or a legal interpretation or opinion.''.
I note, however, that the Federal
Court of Australia published its judgement in relation to the case on 11 August 2022. Costs relating to the case are yet
to be finalised and will be made publicly available once complete.
honourable member for some notice of the question.
(1)–(5) The
premise of the member's question is incorrect and I refer him to
standing order 105(1)(b), which states that questions shall ''not seek
an opinion or a legal interpretation or opinion.''.
I note, however, that the Federal
Court of Australia published its judgement in relation to the case on 11 August 2022. Costs relating to the case are yet
to be finalised and will be made publicly available once complete.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.