Koropachinsky v Wang (No. 2) [2018] NSWDC 319

The plaintiff's offer was a genuine compromise, validly served, and refusal by the defendants was unreasonable; therefore costs should be ordered on an indemnity basis from the date of the offer.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 28 September 2018
Procedural Posture: Civil / Post Judgment (costs Orders)
Outcome: Judgment for plaintiff; Defendants ordered to pay costs as detailed.
Legal Topics: ['indemnity Costs' 'calderbank Offers' 'offer of Compromise' 'motor Vehicle Property Damage']

['costs'] ['indemnity Costs' 'calderbank Offers' 'offer of Compromise' 'motor Vehicle Property Damage']

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

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Judgment (costs Orders)

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether indemnity costs should be awarded after a valid offer of compromise and Calderbank offer' 'Whether the offer represented a genuine compromise']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's offer was a genuine compromise, validly served, and refusal by the defendants was unreasonable; therefore costs should be ordered on an indemnity basis from the date of the offer.

Court Disposition

Judgment for plaintiff; Defendants ordered to pay costs as detailed.

Orders

['Judgment for the plaintiff for $178,993.49 plus interest in the sum of $15,104.91, making a total of $194,098.40.' "Defendants pay the plaintiff's costs on the ordinary basis up until 24 November 2017 and thereafter on an indemnity basis."]