Ku-ring-gai Council v Chan (No 2) [2018] NSWCA 73

Ku-ring-gai Council v Chan (No 2) [2018] NSWCA 73

It was not unreasonable for the plaintiffs to refuse the offer, given the claim involved a novel duty of care requiring close legal and factual analysis, and there was an absence of relevant lay or expert evidence at the time of the offer. Therefore, the Council's application for indemnity costs was refused and the costs were ordered on the ordinary basis.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Post Judgment (costs Orders)
Outcome
Costs orders varied; application for indemnity costs refused; costs on the ordinary basis.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'calderbank Offer' 'duty of Care' 'pure Economic Loss']
['civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'calderbank Offer' 'duty of Care' 'pure Economic Loss']

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

Appeal / Post Judgment (costs Orders)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether plaintiffs should pay Council's costs on indemnity basis after rejecting Calderbank offer" "Whether plaintiffs' rejection of settlement offer was unreasonable given the stage of proceedings and available evidence" 'Whether different costs order should be made in respect of amended defence']

Ratio Decidendi

It was not unreasonable for the plaintiffs to refuse the offer, given the claim involved a novel duty of care requiring close legal and factual analysis, and there was an absence of relevant lay or expert evidence at the time of the offer. Therefore, the Council's application for indemnity costs was refused and the costs were ordered on the ordinary basis.

Court Disposition

Costs orders varied; application for indemnity costs refused; costs on the ordinary basis.

Orders

  • ["Set aside order 2 made on 30 September 2016 and in lieu thereof order that the plaintiffs pay the fourth defendant's costs of their claim against it on the ordinary basis." 'Order that the appellant Council pay the costs of the first and second respondents of this application.']