Romero v Farstad Shipping (Indian Pacific) Pty Ltd (No 2)

The case of Romero v Farstad Shipping (Indian Pacific) Pty Ltd (No 2) involved the applicant, Romero, and the respondent, Farstad Shipping. The dispute arose from a decision concerning the assessment of costs following a prior litigation matter. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The central issue before the court was the proper allocation of costs between the parties, specifically whether the costs should be assessed on a party-party basis or an indemnity basis, and the percentage of those costs that the applicant should bear.

The court had to determine the appropriate method for calculating costs, considering the timing of events in the litigation and the conduct of the parties. It was crucial to establish whether certain costs incurred after a particular time should be assessed on a party-party basis or an indemnity basis. The court also had to decide on the percentage of those costs that should be borne by the applicant, Romero.

In its decision, the court vacated the previous order regarding the costs and substituted it with a new order. The court held that the costs incurred up to a certain time should be assessed on a party-party basis, while the costs incurred thereafter should be assessed on an indemnity basis. Additionally, the court specified that the applicant should pay 85% of the respondent’s costs under these terms. This decision was based on the detailed examination of the conduct of the parties and the relevant legal principles governing costs in litigation.

The court’s final orders mandated that the applicant pay 85% of the respondent’s costs incurred up to a specific time on a party-party basis and 85% of the costs incurred after that time on an indemnity basis. This ruling effectively altered the previous cost allocation and provided clarity on the financial obligations between the parties in the context of their litigation.