Sheahan v Ren (No 2) [2017] FCA 1188

Sheahan v Ren (No 2) [2017] FCA 1188

The applicants are entitled to indemnity costs for the period on and from 13 December 2016 because they proved service of a compliant offer of compromise under Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 25.14, and the requirements of the rule were satisfied.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Commercial and Corporations / Post Judgment Costs Determination
Outcome
Costs order granted in favour of applicants
Legal Topics
['costs' 'offer of Compromise' 'indemnity Costs' 'federal Court Procedure']
['practice and Procedure' 'corporations and Corporate Insolvency'] ['costs' 'offer of Compromise' 'indemnity Costs' 'federal Court Procedure']

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

Commercial and Corporations / Post Judgment Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicants are entitled to indemnity costs based on an offer of compromise compliant with Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 25.14']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants are entitled to indemnity costs for the period on and from 13 December 2016 because they proved service of a compliant offer of compromise under Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 25.14, and the requirements of the rule were satisfied.

Court Disposition

Costs order granted in favour of applicants

Orders

  • ['The respondent is to pay the costs of the first applicant and the second applicant of and incidental to these proceedings for the period up to and including 12 December 2016 on a party and party basis, and for the period on and from 13 December 2016 on an indemnity basis.']