LCM Litigation Fund Pty Ltd v Coope; Coope v LCM Litigation Fund Pty Ltd (No 4) [2015] NSWSC 1158

LCM Litigation Fund Pty Ltd v Coope; Coope v LCM Litigation Fund Pty Ltd (No 4) [2015] NSWSC 1158

LCM was overall successful because it justified terminating Mr Coope's Employment Contract, but its success was incomplete: it did not establish one of the two distinct serious misconduct bases, had not pressed some claims, and had already been subject to certain costs orders. The Calderbank offer was little short of an invitation to capitulate and was not unreasonably rejected, so it did not justify indemnity costs. The $12,085 for Mr Craddock's attendance was not ordered to be repaid because his evidence was primarily directed to issues on which LCM failed. The appropriate order was that Mr Coope pay two thirds of LCM's costs, excluding the $12,085.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Costs / Costs Determination After Judgment in the Proceedings
Outcome
Defendant to pay two thirds of the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings, excluding the $12,085 paid by the plaintiff in respect of Mr Craddock's attendance.
Legal Topics
['calderbank Offer' 'indemnity Costs' 'court Book Costs' 'partial Success' 'witness Travel Costs']
['costs'] ['calderbank Offer' 'indemnity Costs' 'court Book Costs' 'partial Success' 'witness Travel Costs']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Costs / Costs Determination After Judgment in the Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether LCM was entitled to indemnity costs from 5 June 2015 on the basis of its Calderbank offer.' 'Whether LCM was entitled to indemnity costs in respect of preparation of the court book.' "Whether LCM should recover the $12,085 paid for Mr Craddock's attendance in Australia." "What costs order should be made having regard to LCM's overall success and Mr Coope's partial success on issues not pressed or not established by LCM."]

Ratio Decidendi

LCM was overall successful because it justified terminating Mr Coope's Employment Contract, but its success was incomplete: it did not establish one of the two distinct serious misconduct bases, had not pressed some claims, and had already been subject to certain costs orders. The Calderbank offer was little short of an invitation to capitulate and was not unreasonably rejected, so it did not justify indemnity costs. The $12,085 for Mr Craddock's attendance was not ordered to be repaid because his evidence was primarily directed to issues on which LCM failed. The appropriate order was that Mr Coope pay two thirds of LCM's costs, excluding the $12,085.

Court Disposition

Defendant to pay two thirds of the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings, excluding the $12,085 paid by the plaintiff in respect of Mr Craddock's attendance.

Orders

  • ["Mr Coope pay two thirds of LCM's costs of the proceedings." "Those costs are not to include the $12,085 paid by LCM in respect of Mr Craddock's attendance."]