In the matter of Alsafe Security Products Pty Ltd atf the Alsafe Trust (in liquidation) [2016] NSWSC 575

In the matter of Alsafe Security Products Pty Ltd atf the Alsafe Trust (in liquidation) [2016] NSWSC 575

Plaintiffs' offer of compromise was invalid under r 20.26 as it included costs, but was a genuine Calderbank offer. The Defendant's rejection was unreasonable given the discount and abandonment of several defences, warranting indemnity costs from 14 days after offer. Continuance in Supreme Court was warranted given complexity and defences, so costs should be allowed under UCPR r 42.34.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Equity Corporations List / Post Judgment Costs Determination
Outcome
Defendant ordered to pay Plaintiffs' costs on ordinary basis up to and including 7 March 2016 and on indemnity basis from 8 March 2016.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'offer of Compromise' 'indemnity Costs' 'calderbank Principles' 'jurisdiction']
['civil Procedure' 'corporations Law'] ['costs' 'offer of Compromise' 'indemnity Costs' 'calderbank Principles' 'jurisdiction']

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 Corporations List / Post Judgment Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Plaintiffs are entitled to indemnity costs based on offer of compromise or Calderbank principles' 'Whether offer of compromise is valid under UCPR r 20.26' 'Whether proceeding in Supreme Court was warranted under UCPR r 42.34']

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiffs' offer of compromise was invalid under r 20.26 as it included costs, but was a genuine Calderbank offer. The Defendant's rejection was unreasonable given the discount and abandonment of several defences, warranting indemnity costs from 14 days after offer. Continuance in Supreme Court was warranted given complexity and defences, so costs should be allowed under UCPR r 42.34.

Court Disposition

Defendant ordered to pay Plaintiffs' costs on ordinary basis up to and including 7 March 2016 and on indemnity basis from 8 March 2016.

Orders

  • ["Defendant to pay Plaintiffs' costs on ordinary basis up to and including 7 March 2016." "Defendant to pay Plaintiffs' costs on indemnity basis from 8 March 2016."]