JDGD v Allianz Australia Insurance Limited (No 2)

The plaintiff, JDGD, brought an action against Allianz Australia Insurance Limited, seeking compensation for a claim under a policy of insurance. The dispute reached the court, which was tasked with determining the appropriate costs order in the case. Specifically, Allianz had made a Calderbank offer, a type of offer of compromise, and was seeking an alternative costs order on the basis that JDGD had not accepted this offer. The crux of the matter was whether Allianz was entitled to an indemnity costs order due to the failure of JDGD to accept the offer, and whether the plaintiff's consent to the order could be taken into account.

The court considered the precedent established in earlier cases regarding the acceptance of Calderbank offers and the implications for costs orders. It examined whether the offer was genuine and made in good faith, and whether the plaintiff had a reasonable prospect of succeeding at trial. The court also assessed whether the plaintiff had acted unreasonably in not accepting the offer. Importantly, the court noted that JDGD had consented to the indemnity costs order being made, which was a significant factor in its decision-making process.

After reviewing the relevant authorities and the specifics of the Calderbank offer, the court concluded that Allianz was entitled to an alternative costs order. The court found that the offer was made in good faith and that JDGD had no reasonable prospect of success at trial. Given JDGD's consent to the costs order, the court determined that it was appropriate to grant the order. The court emphasised that the consent of the plaintiff was a crucial consideration, as it aligned with the objectives of promoting settlement and efficient use of court resources.

The court made an order that Allianz Australia Insurance Limited recover its costs from JDGD on an indemnity basis, in accordance with the terms of the Calderbank offer. This decision reflects the court's approach to balancing the interests of both parties and the broader objectives of the legal system in managing disputes and costs.