Chubs Constructions Pty Ltd v Chamma

Chubs Constructions Pty Ltd (the appellant) appealed to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against a costs order made by Patten AJ. The dispute concerned the recovery of damages for a work injury, where the respondent had made an offer of compromise.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the respondent's offer of compromise sufficiently complied with clauses 89 and 94 of the *Workers Compensation Regulation 2003* (NSW), and whether the primary judge erred in ordering that the respondent's costs be paid on a party and party basis. Specifically, the court considered whether an offer to settle only the economic loss component of the respondent's claim constituted a final offer to settle the entire claim against all defendants for the purposes of clause 89, and whether such an offer was sufficient for the purposes of clause 94(a).

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the offer of compromise did not sufficiently comply with the requirements of the *Workers Compensation Regulation 2003*. The court reasoned that "the claim" in clause 94(a) referred to the entire claim, not merely a component of it. Consequently, the costs order made by the primary judge was set aside. In lieu thereof, the court ordered that the applicant pay 25% of the respondent's costs of the trial on a party and party basis, reserving the question of the costs of the appeal.