Igloo Homes v Sammut Constructions [2005] NSWSC 85

Igloo Homes v Sammut Constructions [2005] NSWSC 85

Indemnity costs were refused because the 14 May 2004 Calderbank offer and the 27 August 2004 Part 22 offer had to be assessed by reference to the parties' understanding at the time, when they believed the amount short paid was $225,000. On that basis, the $224,000 offer and the $234,000 plus costs offer did not constitute real compromises. Interest on costs was also refused because the evidence did not establish that relevant costs had been paid before judgment took effect.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 February 2005
Procedural Posture
Practice Costs Application for Indemnity Costs / Ex Tempore Judgment on Costs Issues After Judgment of 15 December 2004
Outcome
Indemnity costs not ordered; interest on costs not ordered; plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs of the proceedings; liberty reserved to apply for interest on costs at assessment; additional orders made and stayed for 28 days.
Legal Topics
['indemnity Costs' 'calderbank Offer' 'offer of Compromise' 'genuine Compromise' 'interest on Costs']
['practice and Procedure' 'costs'] ['indemnity Costs' 'calderbank Offer' 'offer of Compromise' 'genuine Compromise' 'interest on Costs']

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

Practice Costs Application for Indemnity Costs / Ex Tempore Judgment on Costs Issues After Judgment of 15 December 2004

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Calderbank letter dated 14 May 2004 offered a genuine compromise sufficient to justify indemnity costs.' 'Whether the offer of compromise dated 27 August 2004 under Part 22, Supreme Court Rules was a real offer of compromise sufficient to justify indemnity costs.' 'Whether an order for interest on costs should be made under section 95(4) Supreme Court Act 1970.']

Ratio Decidendi

Indemnity costs were refused because the 14 May 2004 Calderbank offer and the 27 August 2004 Part 22 offer had to be assessed by reference to the parties' understanding at the time, when they believed the amount short paid was $225,000. On that basis, the $224,000 offer and the $234,000 plus costs offer did not constitute real compromises. Interest on costs was also refused because the evidence did not establish that relevant costs had been paid before judgment took effect.

Court Disposition

Indemnity costs not ordered; interest on costs not ordered; plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs of the proceedings; liberty reserved to apply for interest on costs at assessment; additional orders made and stayed for 28 days.

Orders

  • ['No order for indemnity costs on the basis of the letter of 14 May 2004.' 'No order for indemnity costs on the basis of the offer of compromise dated 27 August 2004.' 'The plaintiff pay the costs of the defendant of the proceedings.' 'No order for interest on costs.' 'Liberty reserved to apply for interest on costs...