Pittorino v Yates

In *Pittorino v Yates*, the claimant appealed to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against a decision concerning the costs of proceedings. The central dispute revolved around whether an offer of compromise, made by the opponent less than two months before the trial commenced, had been left open for a reasonable time for acceptance, thereby justifying a departure from the general rule regarding costs.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the reasonableness of the time an offer of compromise is left open for acceptance should be assessed solely at the date the offer is made, or if it should consider circumstances that arose both before and after that date. This determination was crucial for deciding whether the opponent was entitled to an order for costs on an indemnity basis, as opposed to the ordinary party-and-party basis.

The Court of Appeal considered the principles governing offers of compromise and the discretion of the court in awarding costs. It reasoned that the reasonableness of the time an offer remains open is not confined to the circumstances existing at the moment of its making. Instead, the court must have regard to all relevant circumstances, including those that unfold subsequently, to assess whether the offer was genuinely available for acceptance for a reasonable period. Ultimately, the Court of Appeal dismissed the claimant's appeal, upholding the lower court's decision. The claimant was ordered to pay the opponent's costs of both the summons for leave to appeal and the appeal itself.