Event and Time
Event Description
On 13 August 2021, a judgment was delivered in a defamation case where Mr. Peterson succeeded in two of four claimed defamatory acts against Ms. Simopoulos, resulting in an award of $40,000 in damages.
Application and Claims
- Plaintiff (Mr. Peterson): Sought costs on an indemnity basis under section 40(2)(a) of the Defamation Act 2005, asserting that the defendant unreasonably failed to settle.
- Defendant (Ms. Simopoulos): Argued that costs should align with the Magistrates’ Court scale due to mixed success and claimed that less than half the jurisdictional limit was awarded.
Judicial Decisions
The court determined that Mr. Peterson was entitled to his costs on the County Court Scale and on a standard basis rather than an indemnity basis.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Plaintiff's Claims:
- Entitlement to indemnity costs because the defendant failed to engage reasonably in settlement discussions. - Complexity of defamation litigation necessitating the case be heard in a court with a specialist list, countering the argument regarding jurisdiction.
- Defendant's Claims:
- Touted limited publication of defamatory material and lack of special damages; advocated for costs pursuant to the Magistrates' Court scale. - Argued against the complexity justification, stating no special circumstances warranted a departure from standard costs.
Ruling and Impact
Ruling Result
The court ruled that:
- Mr. Peterson is entitled to legal costs on the County Court Scale.
- He will not receive indemnity costs as the defendant did not unreasonably fail to make a settlement offer.