BELL v VEIGEL; BELL v BROUGHTON; BROUGHTON v VEIGEL (No 2) [2008] NSWCA 110

BELL v VEIGEL; BELL v BROUGHTON; BROUGHTON v VEIGEL (No 2) [2008] NSWCA 110

Successful appeals and cross-appeals are to be awarded costs of those proceedings against respondents opposing them, applying the principle that costs follow the event, influenced by the effect of reasonable offers of compromise (Calderbank offers). Specific costs orders, including stays and remittal for new trial, are made, and matters concerning the ultimate apportionment of trial costs are left to the discretion of the judge at the retrial. Defensive cross-appeals attract no order as to costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Costs Following Prior Substantive Appellate Judgment; Remittal for New Trial Limited to Identification Issues
Outcome
Each appeal and Mrs Broughton's cross-appeal upheld with costs.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'appeal Procedure' 'offers of Compromise' 'sanderson Order' 'calderbank Principles']
['civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'appeal Procedure' 'offers of Compromise' 'sanderson Order' 'calderbank Principles']

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

Appeal / Judgment on Costs Following Prior Substantive Appellate Judgment; Remittal for New Trial Limited to Identification Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Which parties should bear the costs of appeals and cross-appeals?' 'Effect of offers of compromise (Calderbank offers) on cost orders?' 'Should any costs orders be stayed pending possible High Court appeal?' 'Should any Sanderson orders be made with respect to costs?' 'Who should bear costs of cross-claims and cross-appeals?']

Ratio Decidendi

Successful appeals and cross-appeals are to be awarded costs of those proceedings against respondents opposing them, applying the principle that costs follow the event, influenced by the effect of reasonable offers of compromise (Calderbank offers). Specific costs orders, including stays and remittal for new trial, are made, and matters concerning the ultimate apportionment of trial costs are left to the discretion of the judge at the retrial. Defensive cross-appeals attract no order as to costs.

Court Disposition

Each appeal and Mrs Broughton's cross-appeal upheld with costs.

Orders

  • ['In CA 40470/2005: Appeal upheld; third and fourth respondents to pay appellants’ costs of appeal; cross appeal dismissed (no order as to costs of cross-appeal); prior judgments largely set aside; several verdicts and judgments as specified; remitted for new trial limited to identification issues; specified costs...