Coote v Coote (No 2) [2021] NSWSC 461

Coote v Coote (No 2) [2021] NSWSC 461

The Court refused to vary the costs orders to grant indemnity costs against the plaintiff under UCPR r 42.15 because the defendant introduced significant issues after making the offer of compromise, which substantially increased the costs of litigation and ultimately failed on those issues; thus, the circumstances justified not imposing the usual indemnity costs regime post-offer, as to do so would be unjust.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Family Provision/costs Application / Post Judgment; Costs Variation Application
Outcome
Defendant's application to vary the costs orders is dismissed; defendant ordered to pay plaintiff's costs of the application.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'family Provision' 'deceased Estates' 'offers of Compromise' 'indemnity Costs']
['equity' 'succession Law'] ['costs' 'family Provision' 'deceased Estates' 'offers of Compromise' '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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Family Provision/costs Application / Post Judgment; Costs Variation Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the defendant's application to vary previous costs orders under UCPR r 42.15 should be granted after an unsuccessful offer of compromise in family provision proceedings." 'Whether special or indemnity costs orders should be made in favour of the defendant from the date of the offer of compromise given subsequent conduct in litigation.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court refused to vary the costs orders to grant indemnity costs against the plaintiff under UCPR r 42.15 because the defendant introduced significant issues after making the offer of compromise, which substantially increased the costs of litigation and ultimately failed on those issues; thus, the circumstances justified not imposing the usual indemnity costs regime post-offer, as to do so would be unjust.

Court Disposition

Defendant's application to vary the costs orders is dismissed; defendant ordered to pay plaintiff's costs of the application.

Orders

  • ["The defendant's application to vary the costs orders made by the Court on 9 February 2021 is dismissed." "The defendant is to pay the plaintiff's costs of the application."]