Pirrottina v Pirrottina (No 2) [2024] NSWSC 1053

Pirrottina v Pirrottina (No 2) [2024] NSWSC 1053

The Plaintiff's (Rocco's) non-acceptance of a Calderbank offer made by the Defendant (Sam) was unreasonable in all the circumstances, as at the time of the offer key facts were known and undisputed, the offer presented safeguards ensuring fair value and accounts, and Rocco had the benefit of senior counsel and time to consider. Therefore, indemnity costs were warranted from the date of the offer. Additionally, under r 42.8 UCPR, Sam is entitled to indemnity costs from the service of the Notice to Admit Facts, as Rocco's blanket non-admission and failure to amend led to unnecessary proof of facts at trial, prolonging proceedings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Equity/civil (partnership Dissolution, Costs Application) / Post Judgment, Determination of Costs
Outcome
Indemnity costs ordered from 4 April 2023 (after Calderbank offer); ordinary costs prior; costs of references and accounting matters excluded; costs to be assessed if not agreed.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'partnership Dissolution' 'calderbank Offers' 'indemnity Costs' 'notice to Admit Facts']
['equity' 'civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'partnership Dissolution' 'calderbank Offers' 'indemnity Costs' 'notice to Admit Facts']

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

Equity/civil (partnership Dissolution, Costs Application) / Post Judgment, Determination of Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether indemnity costs should be ordered following non-acceptance of a Calderbank offer' 'Whether indemnity costs are recoverable under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 42.8 for proven facts after a Notice to Admit' 'Whether complexity of proceedings justified rejection of Calderbank offer or precluded indemnity costs']

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff's (Rocco's) non-acceptance of a Calderbank offer made by the Defendant (Sam) was unreasonable in all the circumstances, as at the time of the offer key facts were known and undisputed, the offer presented safeguards ensuring fair value and accounts, and Rocco had the benefit of senior counsel and time to consider. Therefore, indemnity costs were warranted from the date of the offer. Additionally, under r 42.8 UCPR, Sam is entitled to indemnity costs from the service of the Notice to Admit Facts, as Rocco's blanket non-admission and failure to amend led to unnecessary proof of facts at trial, prolonging proceedings.

Court Disposition

Indemnity costs ordered from 4 April 2023 (after Calderbank offer); ordinary costs prior; costs of references and accounting matters excluded; costs to be assessed if not agreed.

Orders

  • ["Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant to pay Defendant/Cross-Claimant's costs of proceedings on an ordinary basis up to and including 3 April 2023." "Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant to pay Defendant/Cross-Claimant's costs of proceedings on an indemnity basis from and including 4 April 2023." 'Such costs to exclude costs relating to...