Edwards v Nine Network Australia Pty Limited (No 6)

In the Federal Court of Australia, the matter of Edwards v Nine Network Australia Pty Limited (No 6) involved a dispute over indemnity costs sought by the successful party in a defamation proceeding. The applicant, Ms Edwards, sought indemnity costs from the respondents, Nine Network Australia, following a successful defamation claim. A key issue was whether Ms Edwards' offer of compromise was unreasonable, affecting the entitlement to indemnity costs under the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW). Another legal question was whether the federal court should apply the 'pick-up' provisions of the Defamation Act. The court also considered whether costs should be apportioned on an issue-by-issue basis and the relevance of adverse credibility findings.

The court found that the terms of the judgment were more favourable to Ms Edwards than her offer of compromise, suggesting that her rejection of the offer was not unreasonable. The court held that the Defamation Act's 'pick-up' provisions were applicable in federal jurisdiction, extending the reach of indemnity costs. It also ruled that indemnity costs should not be determined on an issue-by-issue basis and that adverse credibility findings could be relevant to the apportionment of costs. As a result, the court awarded indemnity costs to Ms Edwards, except for those associated with the hearing on the costs question, which were to be paid on a party-and-party basis.

The court ordered that the respondents pay Ms Edwards' costs on a party-and-party basis for the period up to 11.00 am on 15 March 2022 and on an indemnity basis for the period after that date, excluding the costs related to the hearing on the question of costs. The quantification of the costs was to be determined by a Registrar acting as a referee according to the Federal Court Rules. The specific costs for the hearing concerning the question of costs were to be paid on a party-and-party basis.