Linkara Pty Ltd atf Karathanassis Family Trust v Telstra Corporation Ltd (No.2) [2022] NSWDC 240

Linkara Pty Ltd atf Karathanassis Family Trust v Telstra Corporation Ltd (No.2) [2022] NSWDC 240

Given the substantial disproportion between Linkara's claim and the judgment sum awarded, and the circumstances in which Telstra ultimately limited liability through contract provisions raised late, it is fair and just that Linkara pay Telstra's costs. However, as Telstra's offers of compromise did not clearly set out its position on quantum and were not unreasonably rejected, indemnity costs are not justified. A gross sum order for costs is appropriate in view of modest judgments and the need to avoid satellite litigation.

Parties
Plaintiff/cross Defendant: Linkara Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Karathanassis Family Trust; Defendant/cross Claimant: Telstra Corporation Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Trial Costs Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for both parties; cost orders made; no indemnity costs; gross sum costs order.
Legal Topics
Costs, Offers of Compromise, Indemnity Costs, Gross Lump Sum Order
Civil Procedure Costs Offers of Compromise Indemnity Costs Gross Lump Sum Order

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Linkara Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Karathanassis Family Trust

Plaintiff/cross Defendant

Telstra Corporation Limited

Defendant/cross Claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Trial Costs Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What orders should be made to reflect the different judgment awards (including interest)?
  2. 2 Who should bear the costs of Linkara's claim?
  3. 3 Should Linkara pay Telstra's costs on an indemnity basis, taking into account offers of compromise served?

Ratio Decidendi

Given the substantial disproportion between Linkara's claim and the judgment sum awarded, and the circumstances in which Telstra ultimately limited liability through contract provisions raised late, it is fair and just that Linkara pay Telstra's costs. However, as Telstra's offers of compromise did not clearly set out its position on quantum and were not unreasonably rejected, indemnity costs are not justified. A gross sum order for costs is appropriate in view of modest judgments and the need to avoid satellite litigation.

Court Disposition

Judgment for both parties; cost orders made; no indemnity costs; gross sum costs order.

Orders

  • The Defendant pay the Plaintiff $890.90 plus interest of $351.32.
  • The Cross-Defendant pay the Cross-Claimant $1,838.91.