Noye v Robbins [No 6]

The case of Noye v Robbins [No 6] involved a dispute concerning the costs of legal proceedings. The plaintiff, Noye, sought an order for costs against the first defendant, Robbins, who had been successful in their action. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The legal issues revolved around the indemnity principle and the funding agreement for the defendants' costs of action, which was entirely borne by the State of Western Australia.

The court was required to determine whether the successful defendant, Robbins, was entitled to an order for costs against the plaintiff, Noye. Additionally, the court had to examine the terms of the funding arrangement between the defendants and the State. Another issue was whether it was necessary for the State to be joined as a party to the proceedings, and if so, under what legal principles such as indemnity, subrogation, or restitution, Robbins could seek reimbursement of costs from the plaintiff.

The court found that Robbins was entitled to an order for costs against Noye, in accordance with the conditional order of 29 January 2008. The court ruled that the State of Western Australia should be joined as an additional defendant in the proceedings to ensure a comprehensive resolution of the funding arrangement. The court concluded that under the principles of indemnity, Robbins could seek reimbursement of costs from Noye, and thus ordered Noye to pay Robbins' costs.