Baker v Bunnings Group Limited (No 2)

In the matter of Baker v Bunnings Group Limited (No 2), the plaintiff, Mr. Baker, sought indemnity costs against the defendant, Bunnings Group Limited, for their conduct during the litigation process. The dispute originated from an incident where Mr. Baker sustained an injury in a Bunnings store. The case was heard in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

The primary legal issues that the court was required to decide were whether the defendant's conduct warranted an order for indemnity costs and whether the court should award indemnity costs or make an "otherwise" order under section 56(2) of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1995. The court also needed to consider the relevance of the defendant's Calderbank offers in determining the appropriate costs order.

The court dismissed the plaintiff's application for indemnity costs, ruling that the defendant's conduct did not justify such an award. The court found that the defendant had made a genuine attempt to resolve the matter through negotiation, which was reflected in their Calderbank offers. Although the plaintiff did not accept these offers, the court concluded that the defendant's conduct was reasonable and did not warrant indemnity costs. Instead, the court ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs of the amended notice of motion as agreed or assessed, and confirmed the costs order made in favour of the defendant on 18 June 2020.