Sheffield v Brambles Australia Limited and Anor [2002] NSWIRComm 166
Chubb established that it reasonably incurred expense or loss in complying with the applicant's summons and was entitled under Reg.20(3) to an amount sufficient to compensate it, as agreed or assessed. The respondents' offer of $455,000 exclusive of legal costs was an offer of compromise, but the words did not create a right to costs and the Commission's rules did not otherwise confer one on acceptance. Comparing the offer with the order ultimately obtained, including the superannuation and relocation components, the applicant obtained an order of greater value than the offer, so the applicant was entitled to party-party costs of the proceedings. The respondents succeeded on a separate...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 19 July 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Application Under S106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Judgment Re Costs After Judgments on the Substantive Merits and Quantification of Compensation
- Outcome
- Costs determined: Chubb awarded reasonable summons compliance expenses; applicant awarded party-party costs of the proceedings; respondents awarded party-party costs of the privilege issue; compensation figure corrected.
- Legal Topics
- ['costs of Non Party Compliance With Summons to Produce Documents' 'offer of Compromise' 'party Party Costs' 'legal Professional Privilege' 'quantification Correction']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application Under S106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Judgment Re Costs After Judgments on the Substantive Merits and Quantification of Compensation
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether Chubb Security Services Limited, a non-party served with a summons to produce documents, should recover expense or loss incurred in complying with the summons.' "Whether the respondents' offer of compromise of $455,000 exclusive of legal costs gave the respondents an entitlement to costs after the offer." "Whether the applicant obtained an order more favourable than the respondents' offer of compromise for the purposes of r216(6)." 'Whether the respondents should have their costs of the separate legal professional privilege issue on which they succeeded.' 'Whether the quantified compensation should be corrected for an omitted relocation expenses amount.']
Ratio Decidendi
Chubb established that it reasonably incurred expense or loss in complying with the applicant's summons and was entitled under Reg.20(3) to an amount sufficient to compensate it, as agreed or assessed. The respondents' offer of $455,000 exclusive of legal costs was an offer of compromise, but the words did not create a right to costs and the Commission's rules did not otherwise confer one on acceptance. Comparing the offer with the order ultimately obtained, including the superannuation and relocation components, the applicant obtained an order of greater value than the offer, so the applicant was entitled to party-party costs of the proceedings. The respondents succeeded on a separate...
Court Disposition
Costs determined: Chubb awarded reasonable summons compliance expenses; applicant awarded party-party costs of the proceedings; respondents awarded party-party costs of the privilege issue; compensation figure corrected.
Orders
- ['The applicant to pay Chubb Security Services Limited an amount which is sufficient to compensate it for the expense or loss which it reasonably incurred or lost in complying with the summons issued by the applicant and served on it, as agreed or assessed.' 'The respondents to pay the applicant his costs of the...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment