Briffa v Rail Corporation New South Wales (No. 2) [2014] NSWDC 225

Briffa v Rail Corporation New South Wales (No. 2) [2014] NSWDC 225

It was reasonable for the plaintiff to proceed initially against RailCorp alone; third and fourth defendants created uncertainty as to the proper party and did not clarify the operator's identity. The making of a Sanderson order is justified from the date of the third and fourth defendants' joinder. The first defendant is entitled to costs, including indemnity costs from the date of its offer to contribute. The costs orders in relation to the cross-claims reflect success and the terms of the offer to contribute.

Parties
Plaintiff: Josephine Briffa; First Defendant: Rail Corporation New South Wales; Third Defendant: Meduri Enterprises Pty Limited; Fourth Defendant: Frank Meduri
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 September 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Trial, Costs Determination
Outcome
Costs orders and dismissal of certain claims as specified.
Legal Topics
Personal Injury, Costs Orders, Sanderson Order, Bullock Order, Indemnity Costs
Civil Procedure Costs Personal Injury Costs Orders Sanderson Order Bullock Order Indemnity Costs

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 3 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Josephine Briffa

Plaintiff

Rail Corporation New South Wales

First Defendant

Meduri Enterprises Pty Limited

Third Defendant

Frank Meduri

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Trial, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the third and fourth defendants should pay the plaintiff's costs in relation to her unsuccessful claim against the first defendant
  2. 2 Whether a Sanderson or Bullock order should be made
  3. 3 Whether such costs should extend to costs incurred prior to the joinder of the third and fourth defendants

Ratio Decidendi

It was reasonable for the plaintiff to proceed initially against RailCorp alone; third and fourth defendants created uncertainty as to the proper party and did not clarify the operator's identity. The making of a Sanderson order is justified from the date of the third and fourth defendants' joinder. The first defendant is entitled to costs, including indemnity costs from the date of its offer to contribute. The costs orders in relation to the cross-claims reflect success and the terms of the offer to contribute.

Court Disposition

Costs orders and dismissal of certain claims as specified.

Orders

  • The first cross-claim between Rail Corporation New South Wales and McDonald's Australia Ltd is dismissed with no order as to costs.
  • Third and fourth defendants to pay the plaintiff's costs of the action between the plaintiff and the third and fourth defendants on the ordinary basis.