Stavar v Caltex Refineries (Qld) Pty Ltd No 2 [2008] NSWDDT 26

Stavar v Caltex Refineries (Qld) Pty Ltd No 2 [2008] NSWDDT 26

The plaintiff is entitled to ordinary costs up to 2 May 2008 and indemnity costs thereafter against the first defendant, as the plaintiff made a genuine offer of compromise which was more favourable than the judgment. The Dust Diseases Tribunal Regulation does not exhaustively limit the power to award indemnity costs, as the court's discretion persists by reason of common law principles and s 98 of the Civil Procedure Act. In respect of the second, third, fourth, and fifth defendants, indemnity costs are awarded for the period 3 May to 25 June 2008 and one day further, reflecting the timing of admissions of liability. Plaintiff is not entitled to costs of litigating unsuccessful issues...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 September 2008
Procedural Posture
Costs Ruling After Trial Judgment / Post Judgment, Costs Determination
Outcome
Costs orders made: ordinary costs to 2 May 2008 and indemnity costs thereafter against first defendant; indemnity costs against remaining defendants for limited period; plaintiff not entitled to costs of unsuccessful issues; other costs referred to costs assessor.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'mediation' 'offers of Compromise' 'personal Injury' 'asbestos Exposure' 'duty of Care' 'apportionment of Liability']
['civil Procedure' 'torts'] ['costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'mediation' 'offers of Compromise' 'personal Injury' 'asbestos Exposure' 'duty of Care' 'apportionment of Liability']

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 Ruling After Trial Judgment / Post Judgment, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether defendants should pay indemnity costs to plaintiff' 'Whether failure to comply with regulation prevents order for indemnity costs' 'Whether Dust Diseases Tribunal Regulation ousts Civil Procedure Rules on indemnity costs' 'Whether order for indemnity costs may be made only in accordance with the Regulation' 'Whether plaintiff should bear costs of issue on which she failed (duty of care in first and second periods)' "Whether plaintiff should have costs for solicitor's travel and accommodation" 'Whether plaintiff should have costs for copying and providing evidence material']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff is entitled to ordinary costs up to 2 May 2008 and indemnity costs thereafter against the first defendant, as the plaintiff made a genuine offer of compromise which was more favourable than the judgment. The Dust Diseases Tribunal Regulation does not exhaustively limit the power to award indemnity costs, as the court's discretion persists by reason of common law principles and s 98 of the Civil Procedure Act. In respect of the second, third, fourth, and fifth defendants, indemnity costs are awarded for the period 3 May to 25 June 2008 and one day further, reflecting the timing of admissions of liability. Plaintiff is not entitled to costs of litigating unsuccessful issues...

Court Disposition

Costs orders made: ordinary costs to 2 May 2008 and indemnity costs thereafter against first defendant; indemnity costs against remaining defendants for limited period; plaintiff not entitled to costs of unsuccessful issues; other costs referred to costs assessor.

Orders

  • ['Plaintiff to have ordinary costs up to 2 May 2008 from each defendant.' 'Plaintiff to have indemnity costs against first defendant from 3 May 2008.' 'Plaintiff to have indemnity costs against second, third, fourth, and fifth defendants from 3 May 2008 to 25 June 2008 and one day thereafter.' 'Plaintiff not to have...