Keung v Abbott [No 3]

The appeal concerned an application for indemnity costs in the South Australian Supreme Court, brought by the respondent, Mr. Abbott, against the appellant, Mr. Keung. The dispute arose from prior litigation between the parties, where Mr. Keung had been unsuccessful. Mr. Abbott sought indemnity costs on the basis that Mr. Keung's conduct during the proceedings had been unreasonable, warranting a departure from the usual order that costs follow the event.

The central legal issue before the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia was whether Mr. Keung's conduct justified an award of indemnity costs in favour of Mr. Abbott. This required the court to consider the principles governing the award of indemnity costs, particularly in circumstances where a party's conduct is alleged to be vexatious, meritless, or otherwise unreasonable, thereby causing the other party to incur costs that would not otherwise have been necessary.

The Full Court applied the established principles for awarding indemnity costs, which require a higher threshold than ordinary costs. The court found that Mr. Keung's conduct, including his pursuit of a hopeless appeal and his failure to engage constructively with settlement offers, demonstrated an unreasonable approach to the litigation. This conduct was deemed to have caused Mr. Abbott to incur costs beyond those that would ordinarily follow the event, justifying the departure from the general rule.

Consequently, the Full Court ordered that Mr. Abbott be awarded indemnity costs of the appeal.