Paul Harris v Dr Michael Bellemore (No 3) [2010] NSWSC 907

Paul Harris v Dr Michael Bellemore (No 3) [2010] NSWSC 907

The defendant's late admission of liability justified an order for indemnity costs for the costs thrown away by reason of that denial, but not for the entire relevant period claimed by the plaintiff. While offers of compromise by the defendant engaged potential alterations to the ordinary rule as to costs, the court determined that for some periods, the circumstances did not warrant a departure from the general rule; in other periods, the defendant was entitled to indemnity costs post-admission, save for costs specifically carved out by the orders.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 August 2010
Procedural Posture
Medical Negligence / Post Judgment Costs Determination
Outcome
Costs orders made specifying periods for which costs to be paid by each party, with indemnity costs in certain periods and liberty granted to re-list application under section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'offers of Compromise']
['civil Procedure' 'medical Negligence'] ['costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'offers of Compromise']

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

Medical Negligence / Post Judgment Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the defendant should pay the plaintiff's costs on an indemnity basis due to late admission of liability" 'Appropriate costs orders in light of offers of compromise and admissions' 'Treatment of costs regarding expert reports not relied upon']

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant's late admission of liability justified an order for indemnity costs for the costs thrown away by reason of that denial, but not for the entire relevant period claimed by the plaintiff. While offers of compromise by the defendant engaged potential alterations to the ordinary rule as to costs, the court determined that for some periods, the circumstances did not warrant a departure from the general rule; in other periods, the defendant was entitled to indemnity costs post-admission, save for costs specifically carved out by the orders.

Court Disposition

Costs orders made specifying periods for which costs to be paid by each party, with indemnity costs in certain periods and liberty granted to re-list application under section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005.

Orders

  • ["Subject to order 2, defendant to pay plaintiff's costs up to and including 6 March 2009." "Defendant to pay plaintiff's costs thrown away by reason of defendant's denial until 7 April 2009 of the matters admitted by letter that day, including any costs incurred after 6 March 2009, assessed on an indemnity basis."...