Wright by his tutor Wright v Optus Administration Pty Limited (No 2) [2015] NSWSC 288

Wright by his tutor Wright v Optus Administration Pty Limited (No 2) [2015] NSWSC 288

The plaintiff obtained indemnity costs from 9 November 2012 because the plaintiff bettered the offer of compromise by a wide margin and Optus did not establish a compelling reason to displace the rules, as the liability finding was open on the pleaded case of personal negligence. IPA was not awarded indemnity costs because its Calderbank letter and offer of compromise did not resolve the whole controversy between IPA and Optus, particularly the real prospect and eventual success of a statutory indemnity claim under s 151Z(1)(d) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW), making Optus' rejection reasonable.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Costs Ruling / Final Orders Following Judgment, Including Applications for Indemnity Costs
Outcome
Orders in accordance with short minutes; plaintiff's application for indemnity costs allowed; IPA's application for indemnity costs refused.
Legal Topics
['indemnity Costs' 'offer of Compromise' 'calderbank Offer' 'non Delegable Duty' 'statutory Indemnity Under Workers Compensation Legislation']
['costs' 'tort' 'workers Compensation'] ['indemnity Costs' 'offer of Compromise' 'calderbank Offer' 'non Delegable Duty' 'statutory Indemnity Under Workers Compensation Legislation']

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

Costs Ruling / Final Orders Following Judgment, Including Applications for Indemnity Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff was entitled to indemnity costs against Optus from 9 November 2012 following an offer of compromise that the plaintiff bettered.' "Whether Optus showed circumstances justifying departure from the usual indemnity costs consequence of the plaintiff's offer of compromise." 'Whether IPA was entitled to indemnity costs against Optus based on a Calderbank letter dated 4 January 2011.' 'Whether IPA was entitled to indemnity costs against Optus based on an offer of compromise dated 25 August 2011.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff obtained indemnity costs from 9 November 2012 because the plaintiff bettered the offer of compromise by a wide margin and Optus did not establish a compelling reason to displace the rules, as the liability finding was open on the pleaded case of personal negligence. IPA was not awarded indemnity costs because its Calderbank letter and offer of compromise did not resolve the whole controversy between IPA and Optus, particularly the real prospect and eventual success of a statutory indemnity claim under s 151Z(1)(d) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW), making Optus' rejection reasonable.

Court Disposition

Orders in accordance with short minutes; plaintiff's application for indemnity costs allowed; IPA's application for indemnity costs refused.

Orders

  • ['Orders were made in accordance with short minutes of order handed up by counsel amending the orders pronounced on 6 March 2015 and giving effect to these reasons.' 'The plaintiff is to have indemnity costs from 9 November 2012.' "IPA's application for indemnity costs is refused on both bases advanced."]