Bendigo and Adelaide Bank Ltd v Williamson & Anor [2018] NSWSC 1756

Bendigo and Adelaide Bank Ltd v Williamson & Anor [2018] NSWSC 1756

Mr Williamson was bound by the Settlement Agreement, which required payment of the Settlement Sum by 30 September 2018 regardless of the outcome of the Elders proceeding and allowed judgment to be entered if payment was not made. He did not pay by that date, did not rely on the District Court allegations, and did not seek a stay. The pending Elders judgment, alleged hardship, and District Court proceeding did not defeat the Bank's entitlement to judgment. The Settlement Agreement did not clearly depart from the ordinary rule that costs are payable on a party and party basis, so costs were ordered on that basis.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceedings; Application for Judgment Enforcing a Settlement Agreement / Amended Motion for Judgment After Settlement
Outcome
Judgment in favour of the plaintiff against Hugh Williamson in the amount of $403,863.01, plus costs.
Legal Topics
['summary Disposal' 'judgment for Plaintiff' 'enforcement of Settlement' 'mediation Settlement' 'stay of Proceedings' 'costs']
['civil Procedure' 'equity'] ['summary Disposal' 'judgment for Plaintiff' 'enforcement of Settlement' 'mediation Settlement' 'stay of Proceedings' '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

Equity Proceedings; Application for Judgment Enforcing a Settlement Agreement / Amended Motion for Judgment After Settlement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether judgment should be entered against Hugh Williamson under the Settlement Agreement after failure to pay the Settlement Sum by 30 September 2018.' 'Whether the pending Elders proceeding or the District Court proceeding to set aside the settlement justified refusing or staying judgment.' 'Whether the Bank was entitled to costs incurred after the Settlement Agreement on an indemnity basis or only on a party and party basis.']

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Williamson was bound by the Settlement Agreement, which required payment of the Settlement Sum by 30 September 2018 regardless of the outcome of the Elders proceeding and allowed judgment to be entered if payment was not made. He did not pay by that date, did not rely on the District Court allegations, and did not seek a stay. The pending Elders judgment, alleged hardship, and District Court proceeding did not defeat the Bank's entitlement to judgment. The Settlement Agreement did not clearly depart from the ordinary rule that costs are payable on a party and party basis, so costs were ordered on that basis.

Court Disposition

Judgment in favour of the plaintiff against Hugh Williamson in the amount of $403,863.01, plus costs.

Orders

  • ['Judgment in favour of the plaintiff against Hugh Williamson in the sum of $403,863.01, being the Settlement Sum plus interest until 16 November 2018.' "Order Mr Williamson to pay the Bank's costs from 18 August 2017 to date, including the costs of the amended motion filed on 6 November 2018, on a party and party...