Shellharbour City Council v Stewart [2007] NSWLEC 727

When applicant discontinues proceedings without respondent's consent and no disentitling conduct is established, costs are properly awarded to respondent; indemnity costs are not warranted absent unreasonable conduct, and Calderbank principles are not relevant where offers are merely for surrender and payment of costs.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 02 November 2007
Procedural Posture: Class 4 Civil Enforcement / Post Discontinuance Costs Application
Outcome: Applicant ordered to pay costs of former third respondent.
Legal Topics: ['costs' 'discontinuance' 'indemnity Costs' 'calderbank Offers']

['local Government Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['costs' 'discontinuance' 'indemnity Costs' 'calderbank Offers']

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

Procedural Posture

Class 4 Civil Enforcement / Post Discontinuance Costs Application

Legal Issues

1 ["Whether power exists to order respondent to pay applicant's costs following discontinuance without consent" "Whether applicant should pay respondent's costs" "Whether applicant should pay respondent's costs on indemnity basis for unreasonable conduct or non-acceptance of settlement offer" 'Whether Calderbank principles apply where settlement offer is surrender and pay costs']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Applicant ordered to pay costs of former third respondent.

Orders

["Shellharbour City Council to pay Peter Moran's costs of the proceedings, including costs of each party's notice of motion for costs."]