Pittwater Marinas Pty Ltd v Blue Pearl (NSW) Pty Ltd & Ors (No. 2) [2022] NSWDC 389

Pittwater Marinas Pty Ltd v Blue Pearl (NSW) Pty Ltd & Ors (No. 2) [2022] NSWDC 389

The plaintiff was not unreasonable in not accepting the Calderbank offer due to the early stage of proceedings and lack of evidence from the defendants, and the factual and legal complexity warranted the matter being brought in the District Court. Given the plaintiff's only modest success, the appropriate order is that the plaintiff pay 90% of the defendants' costs.

Parties
Plaintiff: Pittwater Marinas Pty Ltd; First Defendant: Blue Pearl (NSW) Pty Ltd; Second Defendant: Prempricha Pam Pamornniyon; Third Defendant: Shaochen Wang
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Judgment Costs Determination
Outcome
Order for plaintiff to pay 90% of defendants' costs.
Legal Topics
Costs, Calderbank Offer, Indemnity Costs, District Court Procedure, UCPR R 42.35
Civil Procedure Costs Calderbank Offer Indemnity Costs District Court Procedure UCPR R 42.35

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pittwater Marinas Pty Ltd

Plaintiff

Blue Pearl (NSW) Pty Ltd

First Defendant

Prempricha Pam Pamornniyon

Second Defendant

Shaochen Wang

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Judgment Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether, because of a Calderbank letter, the defendants should have indemnity costs awarded in their favour after 16 November 2021
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff should be denied any order for costs because of r 42.35 UCPR
  3. 3 Whether orders should be made to reflect the modest success obtained by the plaintiff in contrast to the success of the defendants on nearly all issues

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff was not unreasonable in not accepting the Calderbank offer due to the early stage of proceedings and lack of evidence from the defendants, and the factual and legal complexity warranted the matter being brought in the District Court. Given the plaintiff's only modest success, the appropriate order is that the plaintiff pay 90% of the defendants' costs.

Court Disposition

Order for plaintiff to pay 90% of defendants' costs.

Orders

  • Order the plaintiff to pay 90% of the costs of the first, second and third defendants.