Johansson v Hare

[2006] QSC 261

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Johansson v Hare & Anor [2006] QSC 261

PARTIES:

BELINDA DONNA JOHANSSON (TAYLOR)
(Plaintiff)
v
WAYNE MILTON HARE
(First Defendant)
SUNCORP METWAY INSURANCE LIMITED
(ACN 075 695 966)
(Second Defendant)

FILE NO/S:

137 of 2005

DIVISION:

Trial

PROCEEDING:

Costs

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court, Cairns

DELIVERED ON:

31 July 2006

DELIVERED AT:

Cairns

HEARING DATE:

12 July 2006

JUDGE:

Jones J

ORDER:

The second defendant is to pay the plaintiff’s costs of and incidental to the action to be assessed on an indemnity basis

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – COSTS –  indemnity basis – where plaintiff obtained judgment no less favourable than offer of settlement

R 360 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules

COUNSEL:

Mr G Crow for the plaintiff
Mr R Green for the second defendant

SOLICITORS:

McKays Solicitors for the plaintiff
Grant & Simpson, Lawyers for the defendants

1. When delivering reasons for judgment in this matter I adjourned consideration of the question of costs of the action to allow parties to make submissions.

1. The plaintiff contends that she is entitled to recover costs of the action on an indemnity basis on the grounds that she made an offer to settle which was not accepted by the second defendant and she has now obtained a judgment no less favourable than that offer. The plaintiff relies upon r 360 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules which requires that costs be calculated on the indemnity basis unless the defendant shows another order for costs is more appropriate in the circumstances.

1. The defendant has indicated by letter of its solicitors dated 2 July 2006 that it does not intend to make any submission in relation to costs.

1. In the circumstances then it would appear that the plaintiff is entitled to the costs of the action to be assessed on an indemnity basis and I will so order.

Order

1. The second defendant is to pay the plaintiff’s costs of and incidental to the action to be assessed on an indemnity basis.