Bartlett v Roffey (No 2) [2024] FCA 1026

Bartlett v Roffey (No 2) [2024] FCA 1026

Both parties were partly unsuccessful on the interlocutory application (leave granted but with conditions and failure of applicant’s objective as to venue). In these circumstances, and given the discretionary nature of costs and the nature and timing of offers to compromise, the appropriate order is that each party bear their own costs.

Parties
Applicant: Glen Robert Bartlett; First Respondent: Kate Louise Roffey; Second Respondent: David Ian Rennick; Third Respondent: Steven John Morris; Fourth Respondent: David Alexander Robb
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Costs Determination After Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Each party to bear their own costs of and incidental to the interlocutory application dated 6 September 2023.
Legal Topics
Costs, Interlocutory Applications, Abuse of Process, Jurisdiction, Defamation
Civil Procedure Costs Interlocutory Applications Abuse of Process Jurisdiction Defamation

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Glen Robert Bartlett

Applicant

Kate Louise Roffey

First Respondent

David Ian Rennick

Second Respondent

Steven John Morris

Third Respondent

David Alexander Robb

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Costs Determination After Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs of the interlocutory application should be awarded on an indemnity basis
  2. 2 Whether an offer to compromise regarding transfer of proceedings impacts costs
  3. 3 Whether the proceedings in the Federal Court were an abuse of process and how it bears on costs

Ratio Decidendi

Both parties were partly unsuccessful on the interlocutory application (leave granted but with conditions and failure of applicant’s objective as to venue). In these circumstances, and given the discretionary nature of costs and the nature and timing of offers to compromise, the appropriate order is that each party bear their own costs.

Court Disposition

Each party to bear their own costs of and incidental to the interlocutory application dated 6 September 2023.

Orders

  • The parties bear their own costs of and incidental to the interlocutory application dated 6 September 2023.