Alexsander Bajic v Phillip Paraskevopoulos [2020] NSWSC 2

Alexsander Bajic v Phillip Paraskevopoulos [2020] NSWSC 2

In the circumstances, the defendants' 1 February 2019 'walk away' Calderbank offer was a genuine offer of compromise because it would have ended difficult Supreme Court proceedings and involved the defendants foregoing costs orders to which they would otherwise be entitled. Despite the plaintiff being unrepresented when the offer was made, that factor was not decisive, and indemnity costs were appropriate from after the offer expired.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Judicial Review And/or Leave to Appeal From NCAT Decision / Costs Determination After Leave Was Granted to Withdraw the Application
Outcome
Indemnity costs awarded to the defendants from 9 February 2019, with ordinary costs awarded up to and including 8 February 2019.
Legal Topics
['indemnity Costs' 'calderbank Offer' 'withdrawal of Proceedings' 'judicial Review of NCAT Decision']
['costs' 'civil Procedure'] ['indemnity Costs' 'calderbank Offer' 'withdrawal of Proceedings' 'judicial Review of NCAT Decision']

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

Application for Judicial Review And/or Leave to Appeal From NCAT Decision / Costs Determination After Leave Was Granted to Withdraw the Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendants should receive indemnity costs after the plaintiff rejected a Calderbank offer and later withdrew the proceedings.' "Whether the defendants' 'walk away' offer was a genuine offer of compromise." 'Whether rejection of the Calderbank offer was unreasonable in the circumstances.']

Ratio Decidendi

In the circumstances, the defendants' 1 February 2019 'walk away' Calderbank offer was a genuine offer of compromise because it would have ended difficult Supreme Court proceedings and involved the defendants foregoing costs orders to which they would otherwise be entitled. Despite the plaintiff being unrepresented when the offer was made, that factor was not decisive, and indemnity costs were appropriate from after the offer expired.

Court Disposition

Indemnity costs awarded to the defendants from 9 February 2019, with ordinary costs awarded up to and including 8 February 2019.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiff shall pay the defendants' costs of the proceedings on an ordinary basis, as agreed or assessed, up to and including 8 February 2019." "The plaintiff shall pay the defendants' costs of the proceedings on an indemnity basis, as agreed or assessed, on and from 9 February 2019."]