Gladio Pty Ltd v Buckworth (No 2)

In the matter of Gladio Pty Ltd v Buckworth (No 2), the Supreme Court of Queensland was tasked with addressing a claim for costs made by the plaintiff against the first defendant. The plaintiff's primary contention was that the District Court did not have jurisdiction to hear the matter, and therefore, the Supreme Court should not exercise its residual discretion to award the plaintiff costs. The plaintiff had made a Calderbank offer to settle for $400,000, which was significantly higher than the sum of $145,000 that was the subject of the proceedings. This made the offer unreasonable, leading to the conclusion that the costs order should not be granted in accordance with UCPR rule 42.34.

The court's analysis focused on whether the District Court had jurisdiction over the matter, and if not, whether the Supreme Court should still exercise its discretion to award costs. The court found that the District Court did not have jurisdiction, and the Calderbank offer was unreasonable given the disparity between the offer and the actual amount in dispute. The court adhered to the position set out in UCPR rule 42.34 and ruled that the plaintiff's claim against the first defendant for costs should be dismissed. The court also found that the costs of the plaintiff's cross-claim against the second defendant should follow the event, and the second defendant's cross-claim against its managing agent was reasonable, leading to a decision that the plaintiff and the first defendant should indemnify the second defendant for its cross-claim costs.