AAI Limited v Josipovic (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 1577

AAI Limited v Josipovic (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 1577

Although an offer compromising the claimant's entitlement to damages could in principle engage r 20.26 in these judicial review proceedings because the basal dispute concerned the amount of damages payable, the claimant's offer did not comply with r 20.26. It proposed a lesser monetary judgment but did not identify an order setting aside the claims assessor's certificate or otherwise dispose of the insurer's claim for prerogative relief. Because the certificate remained binding under s.95, the offer did not validly engage r 42.15A, so the application for indemnity costs failed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Costs Application Following Dismissal of Proceedings Challenging a Motor Accident Claims Assessment Certificate / In Chambers on the Papers; First Defendant's Application for Indemnity Costs Under R 42.15 a Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw)
Outcome
First defendant's application for indemnity costs dismissed; each party to bear its or her own costs of the application.
Legal Topics
['offer of Compromise' 'indemnity Costs' 'judicial Review of Claims Assessment Certificate' 'compliance With R 20.26 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw)' 'no Less Favourable Order or Judgment']
['civil Procedure' 'costs' 'administrative Law' 'motor Accidents Compensation'] ['offer of Compromise' 'indemnity Costs' 'judicial Review of Claims Assessment Certificate' 'compliance With R 20.26 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw)' 'no Less Favourable Order or Judgment']

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

Costs Application Following Dismissal of Proceedings Challenging a Motor Accident Claims Assessment Certificate / In Chambers on the Papers; First Defendant's Application for Indemnity Costs Under R 42.15 a Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether an offer of compromise proposing a monetary judgment in a public law claim in the Court's supervisory jurisdiction effectively engaged r 20.26 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)." 'Whether the order dismissing the proceedings was an order on the claim no less favourable to the claimant than the terms of the offer for the purposes of r 42.15A Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).' "Whether the offer complied with r 20.26 by identifying the proposed orders for disposal of the insurer's judicial review claim, including any order setting aside the claims assessor's certificate."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although an offer compromising the claimant's entitlement to damages could in principle engage r 20.26 in these judicial review proceedings because the basal dispute concerned the amount of damages payable, the claimant's offer did not comply with r 20.26. It proposed a lesser monetary judgment but did not identify an order setting aside the claims assessor's certificate or otherwise dispose of the insurer's claim for prerogative relief. Because the certificate remained binding under s.95, the offer did not validly engage r 42.15A, so the application for indemnity costs failed.

Court Disposition

First defendant's application for indemnity costs dismissed; each party to bear its or her own costs of the application.

Orders

  • ["First defendant's application for indemnity costs is dismissed." 'Each party to bear its or her own costs of the application.']