Islam v Ratul (No 2)

The case of Islam v Ratul (No 2) involved the plaintiff, Islam, and the defendant, Ratul, in a dispute primarily concerning indemnity costs. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiff sought indemnity costs for proceedings that were deemed to be an abuse of process, as they involved the relitigating of claims that had been virtually identical and previously rejected by the courts. The dispute centred around whether the plaintiff's litigation was vexatious and an abuse of the court's process, warranting indemnity costs in favour of the defendant.

The court was required to determine whether the plaintiff's conduct constituted "relevant delinquency" under the Civil Procedure Act 2005, which could lead to an award of indemnity costs. This involved assessing whether the plaintiff had acted vexatiously, oppressively, or wrongfully, and whether the defendant had reasonably invited the plaintiff to discontinue the proceedings before judgment was given. The court also had to consider whether the plaintiff's failure to lodge submissions against the adverse indemnity costs order contributed to the award of costs.

The court held that the plaintiff's litigation amounted to an abuse of process and constituted "relevant delinquency" due to the repeated relitigating of the same claims, which had been previously rejected. The court further found that the defendant had reasonably invited the plaintiff to discontinue the proceedings prior to judgment, which the plaintiff had refused. Additionally, the plaintiff's failure to lodge submissions against the adverse indemnity costs order was noted as a contributing factor. Consequently, the court awarded a special order for indemnity costs in favour of the defendant. The court's decision was based on the plaintiff's vexatious and oppressive conduct, which amounted to an abuse of the court's process.