Agricultural and Rural Finance Pty Ltd v Brakatselos

Agricultural and Rural Finance Pty Ltd (the applicant) sought leave to cross-appeal against costs orders made by the primary judge in favour of Brakatselos (the respondent). The dispute concerned the applicant's entitlement to indemnity costs, despite the primary judge ordering costs on the usual basis, notwithstanding the existence of a Calderbank offer made by the applicant.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the primary judge had erred in the exercise of their discretion by refusing to award indemnity costs to the applicant. The applicant contended that a proper application of the principles governing Calderbank offers would have led to an order for indemnity costs in its favour.

The Court of Appeal considered the principles established in *Jones v Bradley (No 2)* regarding the exercise of discretion in awarding indemnity costs following a Calderbank offer. The Court found that there were insufficient grounds to interfere with the primary judge's decision. The primary judge's refusal to award indemnity costs was considered a valid exercise of discretion, and the applicant had not demonstrated any error in that determination.

Consequently, the application for leave to cross-appeal, in so far as it related to the costs orders, was dismissed. The applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.