Jabbar v Gade (No 3) (pseudonyms) [2022] NSWSC 998

Jabbar v Gade (No 3) (pseudonyms) [2022] NSWSC 998

The defendant is entitled to indemnity costs from 18 October 2018 on the basis of the offer of compromise; gross sum costs orders are appropriate considering the background and conduct of proceedings; plaintiff is awarded costs (limited to periods before the offer of compromise and a discrete 2018 order) given discretionary factors and factual complexities, but not for periods after the offer; each party to pay own costs on the respective costs motions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 August 2022
Procedural Posture
Action for Damages (assault and Battery) / Costs Judgment After Substantive Trial and Damages Award
Outcome
Gross sum costs orders made for both plaintiff and defendant; plaintiff directed to bring in Short Minutes of Order within 3 days.
Legal Topics
['costs – Gross Sum Cost Orders' 'indemnity Costs' 'offer of Compromise' 'supreme Court Costs Discretion' 'rule 42.34 – Costs Threshold' 'assault and Battery Claims']
['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['costs – Gross Sum Cost Orders' 'indemnity Costs' 'offer of Compromise' 'supreme Court Costs Discretion' 'rule 42.34 – Costs Threshold' 'assault and Battery Claims']

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

Action for Damages (assault and Battery) / Costs Judgment After Substantive Trial and Damages Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendant is entitled to indemnity costs after an offer of compromise was not accepted' 'Whether gross sum costs orders should be made rather than assessed costs' 'If the plaintiff, whose damages award is below the threshold in r 42.34(1)(a), should nevertheless receive costs' 'Appropriate quantum of costs for both parties']

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant is entitled to indemnity costs from 18 October 2018 on the basis of the offer of compromise; gross sum costs orders are appropriate considering the background and conduct of proceedings; plaintiff is awarded costs (limited to periods before the offer of compromise and a discrete 2018 order) given discretionary factors and factual complexities, but not for periods after the offer; each party to pay own costs on the respective costs motions.

Court Disposition

Gross sum costs orders made for both plaintiff and defendant; plaintiff directed to bring in Short Minutes of Order within 3 days.

Orders

  • ['6 August 2021 costs orders discharged: plaintiff to pay defendant $2,200.' '9 August 2021 costs orders discharged: plaintiff to pay defendant $2,400.' "Plaintiff to pay defendant's costs of proceedings: $80,000." 'Order for costs made on 30 May 2018 discharged: defendant to pay plaintiff $7,070.' 'Plaintiff...