Abraham v St Mark’s Orthodox Coptic College & anor [2006] NSWSC 1271

Abraham v St Mark’s Orthodox Coptic College & anor [2006] NSWSC 1271

The offer of compromise made by the cross-defendant was not a genuine offer with a real element of compromise. Indemnity costs were refused because the offer essentially required the cross-claimants to capitulate, and did not take into account existing orders for costs in favour of the cross-claimants. Costs and disbursements associated with the assessment of damages are to be included in the costs order as they necessarily follow from the determination of liability, and it is impractical and inappropriate to split those costs at this stage.

Parties
Plaintiff: Christopher Abraham BHT Nareem Abraham; Defendant: St Mark's Orthodox Coptic College; Defendant: Coptic Orthodox Church (NSW) Property Trust; Cross Defendant: Nareem Abraham
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil / Costs Decision After Judgment on Liability; Damages to Be Assessed in Future
Outcome
cross-claim dismissed; costs awarded as set out in orders
Legal Topics
Costs, Liability, Contributory Negligence, Damages Assessment, Split Proceedings, Cross Claim
Civil Law Costs Liability Contributory Negligence Damages Assessment Split Proceedings Cross Claim

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher Abraham BHT Nareem Abraham

Plaintiff

St Mark's Orthodox Coptic College

Defendant

Coptic Orthodox Church (NSW) Property Trust

Defendant

Nareem Abraham

Cross Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Costs Decision After Judgment on Liability; Damages to Be Assessed in Future

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether indemnity costs should be ordered in favour of the cross-defendant based on an offer of compromise
  2. 2 Whether costs incurred in the preparation of the damages aspect of litigation are recoverable at this stage

Ratio Decidendi

The offer of compromise made by the cross-defendant was not a genuine offer with a real element of compromise. Indemnity costs were refused because the offer essentially required the cross-claimants to capitulate, and did not take into account existing orders for costs in favour of the cross-claimants. Costs and disbursements associated with the assessment of damages are to be included in the costs order as they necessarily follow from the determination of liability, and it is impractical and inappropriate to split those costs at this stage.

Court Disposition

cross-claim dismissed; costs awarded as set out in orders

Orders

  • the cross-claim is dismissed
  • the cross-claimants shall pay the costs of the cross-defendant of and incidental to the proceedings, as agreed or assessed, which costs shall be payable forthwith