John Sheiles v TB Clarke (Overseas) Pty Limited [2007] NSWIRComm 262

John Sheiles v TB Clarke (Overseas) Pty Limited [2007] NSWIRComm 262

Orders 4 and 5 from the 6 December 2006 judgment are set aside under the slip rule due to omission of opportunity for respondent submissions; costs awarded on a party and party basis following rule 216(6) as the applicant did not better the respondent's offer of compromise; set-off of applicant’s and respondent’s costs order is permissible and ordered; indemnity costs and further set-off or stay of monetary award are not justified by evidence or discretion; interest payable as originally ordered from date of filing to judgment.

Parties
Applicant: John Sheiles; Respondent: TB Clarke (Overseas) Pty Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Post Judgment Notice of Motion Regarding Costs and Correction of Orders
Outcome
Notice of motion granted in part; Orders 1, 4 and 5 of respondent’s notice of motion granted; Order 8 stood over for directions hearing; remainder of notice of motion dismissed.
Legal Topics
Unfair Contract, Costs, Offer of Compromise, Slip Rule, Set Off of Costs, Interest, Stay of Judgment
Employment Law Civil Procedure Unfair Contract Costs Offer of Compromise Slip Rule Set Off of Costs Interest +1 more

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Sheiles

Applicant

TB Clarke (Overseas) Pty Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under S 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Post Judgment Notice of Motion Regarding Costs and Correction of Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Orders 4 and 5 from the 6 December 2006 judgment should be rescinded or set aside under the slip rule
  2. 2 Whether costs should be assessed on a party and party or indemnity basis following rejection of offer of compromise
  3. 3 Whether set-off of applicant's and respondent's costs should be ordered

Ratio Decidendi

Orders 4 and 5 from the 6 December 2006 judgment are set aside under the slip rule due to omission of opportunity for respondent submissions; costs awarded on a party and party basis following rule 216(6) as the applicant did not better the respondent's offer of compromise; set-off of applicant’s and respondent’s costs order is permissible and ordered; indemnity costs and further set-off or stay of monetary award are not justified by evidence or discretion; interest payable as originally ordered from date of filing to judgment.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion granted in part; Orders 1, 4 and 5 of respondent’s notice of motion granted; Order 8 stood over for directions hearing; remainder of notice of motion dismissed.

Orders

  • Orders 4 and 5 from 6 December 2006 judgment (relating to costs and interest) are set aside.
  • Applicant to pay respondent’s costs from 1 May 2003, assessed on party and party basis.