Mann Travel Pty Ltd v Skyscanner Ltd
Case
•
[2021] FedCFamC2G 263
•19 November 2021
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Mann Travel Pty Ltd v Skyscanner Ltd [2021] FedCFamC2G 263
[2021] FedCFamC2G 263
19 November 2021
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Mann Travel Pty Ltd applied for an order that Skyscanner Ltd pay its costs on a party/party basis in accordance with Part 40 of the Federal Court Rules. The application was brought more than 28 days after the proceedings were dismissed by consent, requiring leave to bring the application. The dispute concerns the meaning and effect of a term in a Notice of Offer to compromise made by Skyscanner and accepted by Mann Travel, which referred to the assessment of costs in accordance with Rule 21.11(2) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2011. Skyscanner contends that by referring to Rule 21.11 FCCR, it was accepting assessment upon the item based method set out in FCR Schedule 3, not agreeing to Mann Travel having its costs assessed at the full Federal Court scale. Mann Travel submits that it is entitled to have its costs assessed at the full Federal Court scale. The court held that the construction of the Costs Term must be determined by what a reasonable person would have understood it to mean, requiring consideration not only of the text, but also of the surrounding circumstances known to the parties, and the purpose and object of the transaction. The court accepted that the reference to the incorrect schedule number was an obvious error, and that it was immaterial. The court further held that the meaning of the terms of a contractual document is to be determined by what a reasonable person would have understood them to mean. The court held that the Offer was made with the purpose and object of settling the proceeding, and if it was not accepted, to enable Skyscanner to rely on it for the purposes of costs if the matter proceeded to hearing and Skyscanner obtained a better result than the Offer. The court concluded that by referring to taxation under Rule 21.11 FCCR, Skyscanner was accepting assessment on a party/party basis in accordance with Part 40 of the Federal Court Rules. The court granted leave to the applicant to bring the application and ordered that the respondent pay the applicant’s costs of the proceeding as agreed or to be taxed on a party/party basis in accordance with Part 40 of the Federal Court Rules.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Litigation & Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Limitation Periods
-
Costs
-
Appeal
-
Specific Performance
-
Admissibility of Evidence
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Top Plus Pty Ltd v Yi Star Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] FedCFamC2G 348
Cases Citing This Decision
8
Self Care Corporation Pty Ltd v Green Forest International Pty Ltd (No 15)
[2023] FedCFamC2G 1085
Top Plus Pty Ltd v Yi Star Pty Ltd (No 2)
[2023] FedCFamC2G 348
Microsoft Corporation v CPL Notting Hill Pty Ltd (No 8)
[2022] FedCFamC2G 1033
Cases Cited
12
Statutory Material Cited
6
Active Skin Pty Ltd v Yey Pty Ltd
[2021] FCCA 329
Otter Products v Haydon
[2021] FedCFamC2G 13
45 Degrees North v The Promotions Factory (Costs)
[2004] FMCA 49