Leda v Weerden (No 3) [2006] NSWSC 220

Leda v Weerden (No 3) [2006] NSWSC 220

Issues in negligent advice cannot be separated for costs; offer of compromise was reasonable; costs are awarded to plaintiff until offer, indemnity costs to defendant afterwards; plaintiff indemnifies defendant for cross-claim costs; interest on costs to be paid by defendant as per ratio of assessed costs to total paid.

Parties
Plaintiff: Leda Pty Ltd; Defendant/cross Claimant: John Weerden; Cross Defendant: Leisure Management Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 March 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Trial, Costs Judgment
Outcome
Costs apportioned: plaintiff to 30 January 2006, defendant on an indemnity basis from 31 January 2006; costs to cross defendant; plaintiff to indemnify defendant for cross defendant's costs; interest on costs paid by defendant calculated by ratio of costs allowed on assessment to total costs paid.
Legal Topics
Costs, Negligent Advice, Causation, Reliance, Offers of Compromise, Indemnity, Interest on Costs
Procedure Negligence Commercial Law Costs Negligent Advice Causation Reliance Offers of Compromise +2 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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leda Pty Ltd

Plaintiff

John Weerden

Defendant/cross Claimant

Leisure Management Pty Ltd

Cross Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Trial, Costs Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should be apportioned on discrete issues in negligent advice claim
  2. 2 Whether offer of compromise was reasonable under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, r 20.26(7)(b)
  3. 3 Whether unsuccessful plaintiff should have costs on ordinary basis before rejected offer and defendant have indemnity costs after

Ratio Decidendi

Issues in negligent advice cannot be separated for costs; offer of compromise was reasonable; costs are awarded to plaintiff until offer, indemnity costs to defendant afterwards; plaintiff indemnifies defendant for cross-claim costs; interest on costs to be paid by defendant as per ratio of assessed costs to total paid.

Court Disposition

Costs apportioned: plaintiff to 30 January 2006, defendant on an indemnity basis from 31 January 2006; costs to cross defendant; plaintiff to indemnify defendant for cross defendant's costs; interest on costs paid by defendant calculated by ratio of costs allowed on assessment to total costs paid.

Orders

  • Costs to plaintiff to 30 January 2006.
  • Costs to defendant on an indemnity basis from 31 January 2006.