Event and Time
Event Description
On 3 June 2023, Judge Woodward awarded judgment in favor of the plaintiff, "Mike & Shan," against the defendant, "SJH," for a claim amounting to $1,532,563.00 (including GST) plus interest and costs.
Application and Claims
- Mike & Shan requested an order for costs against SJH, advocating for costs on a standard basis up to 26 August 2022, and on an indemnity basis thereafter.
- SJH contended that costs should be limited to the standard basis only, to be taxed in default of agreement.
Judicial Decisions
- The Court ordered SJH to pay Mike & Shan's costs on a standard basis, emphasizing that costs should generally follow the event unless special circumstances warrant otherwise.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
Mike & Shan’s Arguments:
- Asserted their Calderbank offers were reasonable and should have been accepted by SJH.
- Claimed SJH's refusal of offers warranted costs on an indemnity basis due to unreasonableness in rejecting the offers.
- Highlighted that their claims were ultimately more favorable than what was awarded in the judgment.
SJH’s Arguments:
- Argued that their case had reasonable prospects of success at the time of the rejected offers, indicating the rejection was justified.
- Claimed lack of express instructions and deficiencies from previous contractors were significant defenses against Mike & Shan’s claims.
- Contended that amendments made by Mike & Shan significantly changed the nature of their claims, affecting the assessment of SJH's position.
Third Party Arguments:
- Referenced legal precedents, particularly in Colgate-Palmolive Co & Anor v Cussons Pty Ltd concerning conditions for special costs orders.