Perry & Bell v ARTC & Ors (No 3) [2013] NSWSC 1049

Perry & Bell v ARTC & Ors (No 3) [2013] NSWSC 1049

Plaintiffs are entitled to indemnity costs from the date of their offers of compromise, as defendants failed to displace the usual rule; no Bullock order is granted against the second defendant as its conduct was not unreasonable and did not induce unfair costs burden.

Parties
Plaintiff: William Charles Perry; Plaintiff: Stanley William Bell; First Defendant: Australian Rail Track Corporation Limited; Second Defendant: Kenneth William Eldridge; Third Defendant: GrainCorp Operations Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Post Judgment, Determination of Costs
Outcome
Plaintiffs entitled to indemnity costs from 23 June 2010; no Bullock order against second defendant; short minutes of order to be brought in by parties within seven days.
Legal Topics
Indemnity Costs, Offers of Compromise, Bullock Order, Pleading Requirements
Costs Indemnity Costs Offers of Compromise Bullock Order Pleading Requirements

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Charles Perry

Plaintiff

Stanley William Bell

Plaintiff

Australian Rail Track Corporation Limited

First Defendant

Kenneth William Eldridge

Second Defendant

GrainCorp Operations Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs Application / Post Judgment, Determination of Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether indemnity costs should be awarded to the plaintiffs and from which date
  2. 2 Whether a Bullock order should be made against the second defendant
  3. 3 Whether the second defendant's conduct entitles the plaintiffs to an indemnity for costs payable to the third defendant

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiffs are entitled to indemnity costs from the date of their offers of compromise, as defendants failed to displace the usual rule; no Bullock order is granted against the second defendant as its conduct was not unreasonable and did not induce unfair costs burden.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs entitled to indemnity costs from 23 June 2010; no Bullock order against second defendant; short minutes of order to be brought in by parties within seven days.

Orders

  • Plaintiffs entitled to indemnity costs from 23 June 2010.
  • No Bullock order against second defendant.