Walker v New South Wales Bar Association (No 2) [2016] FCA 1051

Walker v New South Wales Bar Association (No 2) [2016] FCA 1051

Because there was a possibility of conflict between the respondents and separate representation was reasonable, the applicant should pay the respondents' costs, including two sets of costs, but no indemnity costs are awarded to the second respondent as the offer of compromise was insufficiently certain and lacked a real element of compromise.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 August 2016
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Post Trial; After Dismissal of Substantive Proceeding
Outcome
Orders made for applicant to pay respondents’ costs; no order as to costs for second respondent's indemnity costs application.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'offer of Compromise' 'multiple Representation' 'conflict of Interest']
['civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'offer of Compromise' 'multiple Representation' 'conflict of Interest']

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

Procedural Posture

Costs Application / Post Trial; After Dismissal of Substantive Proceeding

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether applicant should pay multiple sets of costs to respondents with separate representation' 'Whether second and third respondents are entitled to costs when indemnified by the first respondent' 'Whether second respondent is entitled to indemnity costs following an offer of compromise']

Ratio Decidendi

Because there was a possibility of conflict between the respondents and separate representation was reasonable, the applicant should pay the respondents' costs, including two sets of costs, but no indemnity costs are awarded to the second respondent as the offer of compromise was insufficiently certain and lacked a real element of compromise.

Court Disposition

Orders made for applicant to pay respondents’ costs; no order as to costs for second respondent's indemnity costs application.

Orders

  • ["Subject to order 2 below, the applicant pay the respondents' costs of the proceeding to be taxed in default of agreement." "There be no order as to the costs of the second respondent's application for costs on an indemnity basis on and from 13 January 2016."]