Bartlett v Coomber (No 2) [2008] NSWCA 282

Bartlett v Coomber (No 2) [2008] NSWCA 282

The refusal of the Calderbank offer was not unreasonable as the offer involved only a small advantage to the appellant and the appellant had a reasonable basis for an appeal. The appellant did not occasion any significant unnecessary costs, and the case pursued was not hopeless; thus, indemnity costs were not justified.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Post Judgment Costs Application
Outcome
Application for indemnity costs dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'calderbank Offer' 'appeal Procedure']
['civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'indemnity Costs' 'calderbank Offer' 'appeal Procedure']

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

Appeal / Post Judgment Costs Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether indemnity costs should be awarded to the first respondent based on the conduct of the appeal and refusal of a Calderbank offer.']

Ratio Decidendi

The refusal of the Calderbank offer was not unreasonable as the offer involved only a small advantage to the appellant and the appellant had a reasonable basis for an appeal. The appellant did not occasion any significant unnecessary costs, and the case pursued was not hopeless; thus, indemnity costs were not justified.

Court Disposition

Application for indemnity costs dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Application for indemnity costs dismissed with costs.']