Lee (a pseudonym) v Dhupar (No 2) [2020] NSWDC 757

Lee (a pseudonym) v Dhupar (No 2) [2020] NSWDC 757

The plaintiff is entitled to indemnity costs from 15 May 2018 because she made a genuine and reasonable offer of compromise on 14 May 2018, which was not accepted, and later obtained a judgment significantly exceeding that offer; the defendant's stay application is refused as she has neither filed actual grounds of appeal nor demonstrated a sufficient risk justifying a stay.

Parties
Plaintiff: Jodie Lee (a pseudonym); Defendant: Nita Dhupar
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Costs Application and Stay Application Following Civil Judgment / Post Judgment; Hearing of Notices of Motion for Indemnity Costs and Stay
Outcome
Plaintiff's notice of motion largely granted; defendant's notice of motion dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs, Indemnity Costs, Stay of Judgment, Offers of Compromise
Civil Procedure Costs Indemnity Costs Stay of Judgment Offers of Compromise

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 4 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jodie Lee (a pseudonym)

Plaintiff

Nita Dhupar

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs Application and Stay Application Following Civil Judgment / Post Judgment; Hearing of Notices of Motion for Indemnity Costs and Stay

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff is entitled to indemnity costs following judgment in her favour exceeding offers of compromise
  2. 2 Whether defendant is entitled to a stay of execution of judgment pending potential appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff is entitled to indemnity costs from 15 May 2018 because she made a genuine and reasonable offer of compromise on 14 May 2018, which was not accepted, and later obtained a judgment significantly exceeding that offer; the defendant's stay application is refused as she has neither filed actual grounds of appeal nor demonstrated a sufficient risk justifying a stay.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's notice of motion largely granted; defendant's notice of motion dismissed

Orders

  • The judgment amount of $408,700 is varied and amended to $404,474.20 to reflect revised out-of-pocket expenses
  • Defendant to pay plaintiff's costs on the ordinary basis to 14 May 2018