JONES v. SUTTON [No. 2] [2005] NSWCA 203

JONES v. SUTTON [No. 2] [2005] NSWCA 203

The case was an exceptional one where, due to the appellant's conduct, adverse credit findings, limited publication, and disproportionate costs to damages, it was necessary to depart from the default rule on costs (solicitor and client after offer of compromise). The appellant was awarded only a portion of his costs related to the jury trial, specifically four days and reasonable pre-trial preparation on a party/party basis; for the rest of the proceedings at first instance and this appeal, each party is to bear their own costs.

Parties
Appellant: Darren Gregor Jones; Respondent: Ruth Sutton
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 June 2005
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Costs Determination After Appeal Allowed
Outcome
Costs orders varied: respondent to pay appellant's costs of the hearing before the jury (4 days plus reasonable preparation) on party/party basis; each party otherwise to pay own costs at first instance and on appeal.
Legal Topics
Costs, Offers of Compromise, Vindication of Reputation, Discretion as to Costs, Exceptional Case in Costs, Defamation Damages, Jury Trial Procedure
Defamation Civil Procedure Costs Offers of Compromise Vindication of Reputation Discretion as to Costs Exceptional Case in Costs Defamation Damages +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Darren Gregor Jones

Appellant

Ruth Sutton

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Costs Determination After Appeal Allowed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant should be awarded costs of proceedings at first instance and on appeal after making an offer to compromise; whether costs should be assessed on a solicitor and client basis; whether the District Court Rules on offers and costs bind the Court of Appeal; the effect of the appellant’s conduct and motivation on the costs entitlement.

Ratio Decidendi

The case was an exceptional one where, due to the appellant's conduct, adverse credit findings, limited publication, and disproportionate costs to damages, it was necessary to depart from the default rule on costs (solicitor and client after offer of compromise). The appellant was awarded only a portion of his costs related to the jury trial, specifically four days and reasonable pre-trial preparation on a party/party basis; for the rest of the proceedings at first instance and this appeal, each party is to bear their own costs.

Court Disposition

Costs orders varied: respondent to pay appellant's costs of the hearing before the jury (4 days plus reasonable preparation) on party/party basis; each party otherwise to pay own costs at first instance and on appeal.

Orders

  • Rescind Order 7 made 26 November 2004.
  • Vacate the costs orders made by the trial judge.