Dickson v Northern Lakes Rugby League Sport & Recreation Club Inc & Anor (No.3) [2019] NSWDC 478

Dickson v Northern Lakes Rugby League Sport & Recreation Club Inc & Anor (No.3) [2019] NSWDC 478

It was not unreasonable for the plaintiff to reject the offer of compromise as at July 2018 given the stage of proceedings, the modest value of the costs foregone compared with potential damages, information imbalance regarding the second defendant's intention, and that the claim was not frivolous or vexatious. Exceptional circumstances justified the Court exercising discretion to order that costs be paid only on the ordinary basis, not indemnity.

Parties
Plaintiff: Mr Dickson; First Defendant: Northern Lakes Rugby League Sport & Recreation Club Inc; Second Defendant: Mr Fletcher
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Judgment Costs Application
Outcome
Application to vary the costs order is dismissed. Defendants to pay the plaintiff's costs of the application.
Legal Topics
Costs, Offer of Compromise, Indemnity Costs, Walk Away Offers
Civil Procedure Costs Offer of Compromise Indemnity Costs Walk Away Offers

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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Dickson

Plaintiff

Northern Lakes Rugby League Sport & Recreation Club Inc

First Defendant

Mr Fletcher

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Judgment Costs Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the offer of compromise was a genuine offer of compromise and engaged the indemnity costs provisions under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 42.15A
  2. 2 Whether it was unreasonable for the plaintiff to reject the offer
  3. 3 Whether the Court should exercise its discretion to otherwise order

Ratio Decidendi

It was not unreasonable for the plaintiff to reject the offer of compromise as at July 2018 given the stage of proceedings, the modest value of the costs foregone compared with potential damages, information imbalance regarding the second defendant's intention, and that the claim was not frivolous or vexatious. Exceptional circumstances justified the Court exercising discretion to order that costs be paid only on the ordinary basis, not indemnity.

Court Disposition

Application to vary the costs order is dismissed. Defendants to pay the plaintiff's costs of the application.

Orders

  • Order 2 made on 23 August 2019 not varied.
  • Defendants/applicants to pay the respondent/plaintiff's costs of the application.