REBENTA PTY LTD v WISE (NO 2) [2009] NSWCA 334

REBENTA PTY LTD v WISE (NO 2) [2009] NSWCA 334

The respondent's appeal offer complied with the UCPR and, the respondent having succeeded on the appeal, there was no reason to order otherwise than indemnity costs from after that offer. The earlier pre-trial offer also justified indemnity costs from the commencement of the proceedings in this Court because the same claim and issues were involved, the appellant had full information and knew its failure to accept the offer had produced indemnity costs below, there was no separate challenge to that costs order, and the offer was renewed at the first reasonable opportunity in this Court.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal; Consequential Costs Orders / On the Papers After Dismissal of the Appeal, on the Respondent's Submissions Seeking Variation of the Costs Order
Outcome
Orders made on 24 July 2009 varied; appeal dismissed; appellant ordered to pay respondent's costs in this Court on the indemnity basis.
Legal Topics
['indemnity Costs' 'offer of Compromise' 'costs on Appeal' 'pre Trial Offer of Settlement']
['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['indemnity Costs' 'offer of Compromise' 'costs on Appeal' 'pre Trial Offer of Settlement']

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

Civil Appeal; Consequential Costs Orders / On the Papers After Dismissal of the Appeal, on the Respondent's Submissions Seeking Variation of the Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the appellant should pay the respondent's costs of the appeal on an indemnity basis following an offer of compromise made in the appeal." 'Whether a pre-trial offer of settlement could justify indemnity costs for costs incurred in this Court before the appeal offer was made.']

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent's appeal offer complied with the UCPR and, the respondent having succeeded on the appeal, there was no reason to order otherwise than indemnity costs from after that offer. The earlier pre-trial offer also justified indemnity costs from the commencement of the proceedings in this Court because the same claim and issues were involved, the appellant had full information and knew its failure to accept the offer had produced indemnity costs below, there was no separate challenge to that costs order, and the offer was renewed at the first reasonable opportunity in this Court.

Court Disposition

Orders made on 24 July 2009 varied; appeal dismissed; appellant ordered to pay respondent's costs in this Court on the indemnity basis.

Orders

  • ['Vary the orders made on 24 July 2009 so that they provide:' 'Dismiss the appeal.' "Order the appellant to pay the respondent's costs in this Court, to be assessed on the indemnity basis."]