Sahin v National Australia Bank Ltd

In the case of Sahin v National Australia Bank Ltd, the appellants sought to appeal a decision made in a prior proceeding, wherein they had been unsuccessful. The respondents, the National Australia Bank, sought the costs of the appeal. The appellants had made a Calderbank offer to the respondents, which was rejected. The Court of Appeal was tasked with determining whether the rejection of the Calderbank offer was reasonable and whether there should be a departure from the general rule that costs follow the event.

The court needed to decide whether the rejection of the Calderbank offer was reasonable in the circumstances and whether there should be a departure from the general rule that costs follow the event. The court also needed to consider whether the matter should have been raised on the earlier appeal.

The court found that the rejection of the Calderbank offer was reasonable, given that it required the appellants to give up their claim while requiring very little by way of compromise from the respondents. The court also found that there should be a departure from the general rule that costs follow the event because the parties had failed to raise the matter on the earlier appeal. The court noted that section 1 of the Civil Procedure Act 2010 (Vic) empowers the court to depart from the general rule where it considers it just to do so. The court also noted that section 28 of the same Act provides that where a party makes a Calderbank offer, the court may take into account the offer when determining costs.

The court ordered that the respondents pay the costs of the appeal on an indemnity basis. The court found that the appellants' rejection of the Calderbank offer was reasonable and that the respondents had not made a sufficient compromise. The court also found that the matter should not have been raised on the earlier appeal, and therefore, the general rule that costs follow the event should not apply.