Dunne v Radburn (No 2) [2020] NSWSC 63

Dunne v Radburn (No 2) [2020] NSWSC 63

The rejection of Brett's offer was not unreasonable because Vanessa's claims concerned administration of the estate rather than fixed monetary claims, the financial consequences of estate distribution were unclear when the offer was made and remained unclear, and it could not be said that Vanessa was required to...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Costs in Proceedings Concerning Administration of a Deceased Estate / Costs Determination After Principal Judgment
Outcome
Calderbank offer argument rejected; defendant ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings including the costs of the cross-claim.
Legal Topics
['calderbank Offer' 'administration of Deceased Estate' 'costs of Proceedings' 'cross Claim']
['costs' 'equity' 'succession'] ['calderbank Offer' 'administration of Deceased Estate' 'costs of Proceedings' 'cross Claim']

Source-derived case record

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

Costs in Proceedings Concerning Administration of a Deceased Estate / Costs Determination After Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the defendant's 8 August 2018 informal offer should be treated as a Calderbank offer justifying indemnity costs against the plaintiff from the date of the offer." 'Whether the rejection of the offer was unreasonable when the proceedings concerned estate administration issues rather than claims for specific sums of money.' 'Whether costs should be assessed by reference to the ultimate distribution of the estate or by reference to success or failure on the issues actually litigated.']

Ratio Decidendi

The rejection of Brett's offer was not unreasonable because Vanessa's claims concerned administration of the estate rather than fixed monetary claims, the financial consequences of estate distribution were unclear when the offer was made and remained unclear, and it could not be said that Vanessa was required to abandon contentions on which she was ultimately vindicated. Accordingly, the Calderbank argument was rejected and Brett was ordered to pay Vanessa's costs, including the costs of the cross-claim.

Court Disposition

Calderbank offer argument rejected; defendant ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings including the costs of the cross-claim.

Orders

  • ["Order that the defendant pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings including the costs of the cross-claim."]