Williams Anthony Christopher & Ors v Commonwealth Bank of Australia & Ors [1995] FCA 992

Williams Anthony Christopher & Ors v Commonwealth Bank of Australia & Ors [1995] FCA 992

The Bank's offer did not provide a substantial benefit or significant compromise to the applicants and cross-respondents when assessed against the proceedings as a whole; it required judgment, payment of substantial sums, costs consequences and abandonment of claims, and effectively called for capitulation. Although O23 r11(4) could apply to the cross-claim, the Court exercised its discretion against awarding indemnity costs, except for the costs order already made on 5 May 1995.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 November 1995
Procedural Posture
Federal Court Proceeding Involving an Application, Cross Claim, and Application for Indemnity Costs / Post Judgment Reasons and Orders on Disputed Costs Following Reasons Delivered on 20 October 1995
Outcome
The application was dismissed; indemnity costs were refused except to the extent of the costs order made on 5 May 1995; judgment was entered for the cross-claimant on the cross-claim.
Legal Topics
['indemnity Costs' 'offer of Compromise' 'federal Court Rules O23 R11(4)' 'cross Claim for Monies Owing Under Securities']
['costs' 'civil Procedure' 'banking and Finance'] ['indemnity Costs' 'offer of Compromise' 'federal Court Rules O23 R11(4)' 'cross Claim for Monies Owing Under Securities']

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

Federal Court Proceeding Involving an Application, Cross Claim, and Application for Indemnity Costs / Post Judgment Reasons and Orders on Disputed Costs Following Reasons Delivered on 20 October 1995

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the respondent Bank was entitled to indemnity costs from 24 June 1995 because of an offer of compromise made on 23 June 1995 pursuant to O23 of the Federal Court Rules 1979.' 'Whether the offer contained a real element of compromise or substantial benefit, rather than requiring capitulation.' 'Whether the Court should exercise its discretion to award indemnity costs in relation to the application and the cross-claim.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Bank's offer did not provide a substantial benefit or significant compromise to the applicants and cross-respondents when assessed against the proceedings as a whole; it required judgment, payment of substantial sums, costs consequences and abandonment of claims, and effectively called for capitulation. Although O23 r11(4) could apply to the cross-claim, the Court exercised its discretion against awarding indemnity costs, except for the costs order already made on 5 May 1995.

Court Disposition

The application was dismissed; indemnity costs were refused except to the extent of the costs order made on 5 May 1995; judgment was entered for the cross-claimant on the cross-claim.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' "The applicants pay the respondent's costs of the application to the extent referred to in the Orders made by the Court on 5 May 1995 on an indemnity basis and otherwise on a party/party basis, as taxed or agreed." 'Judgment for the cross-claimant on the cross-claim as against the...