(re Rowley) The University of Adelaide v BI (Contracting) Pty Limited [2007] NSWDDT 3

(re Rowley) The University of Adelaide v BI (Contracting) Pty Limited [2007] NSWDDT 3

The University of Adelaide is entitled to a contribution from BI (Contracting) Pty Limited towards costs paid to Professor Rowley because such recoveries are permitted under legislation and authorities, Professor Rowley was liable to his solicitors for costs even absent a formal costs agreement, and the amount of $120,000 paid was reasonable given the complexity and evidence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Contribution Claim (cross Claim) / Post Judgment Application for Costs and Leave to Reopen
Outcome
Judgment for cross claimant on cross-claim
Legal Topics
['contribution Between Tortfeasors' 'assessment of Costs' 'reasonableness of Settlement' 'indemnity Principle']
['torts' 'contribution'] ['contribution Between Tortfeasors' 'assessment of Costs' 'reasonableness of Settlement' 'indemnity Principle']

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

Contribution Claim (cross Claim) / Post Judgment Application for Costs and Leave to Reopen

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the University of Adelaide is entitled to recover a contribution from BI (Contracting) Pty Limited towards costs paid to Professor Rowley.' 'Whether $120,000 was a reasonable amount for the costs paid to Professor Rowley.' 'Whether the indemnity principle prevents recovery of costs in the absence of a costs agreement.']

Ratio Decidendi

The University of Adelaide is entitled to a contribution from BI (Contracting) Pty Limited towards costs paid to Professor Rowley because such recoveries are permitted under legislation and authorities, Professor Rowley was liable to his solicitors for costs even absent a formal costs agreement, and the amount of $120,000 paid was reasonable given the complexity and evidence.

Court Disposition

Judgment for cross claimant on cross-claim

Orders

  • ['Leave granted to cross-claimant to reopen its case.' 'The just and equitable contribution is assessed at $129,500.' 'Interest on that sum is agreed at $32,914.' 'Verdict and judgment for the cross-claimant in the sum of $162,414.' "Cross-defendant to pay the cross-claimant's costs of the cross-claim, save as...