Forostenko v Springfree Trampoline Australia Pty Ltd (No.2)

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:	Forostenko v Springfree Trampoline Australia Pty Ltd (No.
2) [2024] QSC 126
PARTIES:	Phillip Anthony Forostenko v Springfree Trampoline Australia Pty Ltd
FILE NO:	BS9922/19
DIVISION:	Trial Division
PROCEEDING:	Claim
ORIGINATING	Supreme Court at Brisbane
COURT:
DELIVERED ON:	19 June 2024
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	On the papers
JUDGE:	Hindman J
ORDER:	The defendant is to pay the plaintiff’s costs of the
proceeding on the standard basis assessed on the District Court scale.
CATCHWORDS:	PROCEDURE – COSTS – GENERAL RULE – COSTS FOLLOW THE EVENT – OFFERS TO SETTLE – where
the proceeding involved a successful claim for damages by the plaintiff for personal injury - where plaintiff beat his offers - whether the defendant should pay indemnity costs of the proceeding - whether other costs orders are appropriate to
reflect plaintiff’s conduct of case, limited success and other
matters
Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002 (Qld) ss. 40(7), 40(8) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) rr. 5, 186, 360, 381, 386, 684
Bulsey v State of Queensland [2016] QCA 158 McChesney v Singh [2004] QCA 217 Nortask Pty Ltd v Areva Solar KCP Pty Ltd (No. 2) [2018] QSC 210
COUNSEL:	DJ Campbell KC and PW Hackett for the plaintiff RC Morton for the defendant
SOLICITORS:	McInnes Wilson Lawyers for the plaintiff Hall and Wilcox Lawyers for the defendant

Introduction

1. The plaintiff claimed damages in relation to a foot injury suffered by him on 25

   December 2017 while jumping on a Springfree trampoline. The defendant is the

   manufacturer of the Springfree trampoline.

2. After a contested trial where both liability and quantum were in issue, on 28 May 2024

   judgment was given for the plaintiff against the defendant in the sum of $744,175.[1] The

   parties were directed to provide, and did provide, written submissions on costs. The

   parties were invited to make written submissions in reply on costs if they wished to do

   so, and the plaintiff has done so. Some evidence in support of submissions was provided.

   This is the costs decision.

   [1] Forostenko v Springfree Trampoline Australia Pty Ltd [2024] QSC 1.

3. The outcome is that the defendant is to pay the plaintiff’s costs of the proceeding on a

   standard basis assessed on the District Court scale.[2]

The plaintiff’s position on costs

[2] Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) (UCPR), sch 1.

1. The plaintiff seeks that the defendant pay his costs of the proceeding on the indemnity

   basis relying in particular upon two facts:

(a) the plaintiff at trial has beaten his mandatory final offer made 15 July 2019 of

$500,000 plus costs assessed on the District Court scale;

(b) the plaintiff at trial has beaten his formal UCPR offer made 23 May 2022 of

$250,000 plus costs.

1. If there were no other relevant facts to be considered, the plaintiff’s submission on costs

   would be difficult to resist.[3]

   [3] Having regard to sections 40(7) and (8) of the Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002 (Qld) (PIPA), rules 360 and…