Sethi v CGU Workers Compensation (NSW) Limited and QBC Workers Compensation (NSW) Limited [2005] NSWDDT 38

Sethi v CGU Workers Compensation (NSW) Limited and QBC Workers Compensation (NSW) Limited [2005] NSWDDT 38

Because the proceeding settled two days after the hearing was vacated on an offer already on foot, the only costs effectively lost by the adjournment were the defendants' costs of attending the Tribunal on 10 May 2005 for the adjournment application; no further costs order was warranted apart from the specific District Court costs directions addressed after the parties' submissions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Dust Diseases Tribunal Civil Proceedings Concerning Costs Thrown Away by Adjournment After Settlement / Ex Tempore Judgment on Costs
Outcome
Costs order made in limited terms after settlement.
Legal Topics
['costs Thrown Away by Adjournment' 'settlement' 'offer of Compromise' 'reserved Costs']
['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['costs Thrown Away by Adjournment' 'settlement' 'offer of Compromise' 'reserved Costs']

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

Dust Diseases Tribunal Civil Proceedings Concerning Costs Thrown Away by Adjournment After Settlement / Ex Tempore Judgment on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiff should pay the defendants' costs thrown away by the adjournment of the hearing fixed for 16, 17 and 18 May 2005." 'Whether any order should be made about costs in earlier District Court proceedings.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the proceeding settled two days after the hearing was vacated on an offer already on foot, the only costs effectively lost by the adjournment were the defendants' costs of attending the Tribunal on 10 May 2005 for the adjournment application; no further costs order was warranted apart from the specific District Court costs directions addressed after the parties' submissions.

Court Disposition

Costs order made in limited terms after settlement.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiff is to pay the defendants' costs of attending the Tribunal on 10 May 2005 when the application for adjournment of the hearing was made." 'Otherwise, each party is to pay its own costs thrown away by the adjournment of the proceedings on 10 May 2005.' 'No costs in respect of the District Court date on...