Stasiuk v Monster Energy Au Pty Ltd (No 3) [2024] FCA 1052
The applicant unreasonably failed to accept the respondents' offer of compromise made on 28 November 2023, justifying indemnity costs from 1 December 2023. Costs are appropriately fixed in a lump sum (excluding future enforcement in foreign jurisdiction), given the applicant's conduct and circumstances.
- Parties
- Applicant: Joseph Stasiuk; First Respondent: Monster Energy Au Pty Ltd; Second Respondent: Monster Energy Company
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 11 September 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Lump Sum Costs Order / Post Dismissal, Costs Determination
- Outcome
- Application for lump sum costs order allowed in part; costs awarded in lump sum including indemnity costs from 1 December 2023, excluding enforcement costs in foreign jurisdiction.
- Legal Topics
- Patent Infringement, Costs Lump Sum, Indemnity Costs, Offers of Compromise, Enforcement of Costs Orders
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Joseph Stasiuk
Applicant
Monster Energy Au Pty Ltd
First Respondent
Monster Energy Company
Second Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Lump Sum Costs Order / Post Dismissal, Costs Determination
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether costs should be awarded on an indemnity basis following offer of compromise
- 2 Whether costs should be awarded in a lump sum
- 3 Whether costs should include costs of enforcement in a foreign jurisdiction
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant unreasonably failed to accept the respondents' offer of compromise made on 28 November 2023, justifying indemnity costs from 1 December 2023. Costs are appropriately fixed in a lump sum (excluding future enforcement in foreign jurisdiction), given the applicant's conduct and circumstances.
Court Disposition
Application for lump sum costs order allowed in part; costs awarded in lump sum including indemnity costs from 1 December 2023, excluding enforcement costs in foreign jurisdiction.
Orders
- The applicant pay the respondents' costs of the proceeding as assessed in the sum of $520,000.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment