Simone Starr-Diamond v Talus Diamond (No 2)

This case involved a dispute between Simone Starr-Diamond and Talus Diamond regarding costs following an unsuccessful claim by the plaintiff. The dispute was heard and determined in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant had only admitted the existence of a de facto relationship just before the trial, which she claimed led to an increase in her legal costs. Consequently, the plaintiff sought indemnity costs against the defendant.

The court was required to decide whether the defendant's late admission of the de facto relationship had a significant impact on the plaintiff's legal costs and whether the plaintiff was entitled to indemnity costs. The court considered the timing of the admission and its potential effect on the plaintiff's costs. The court noted that the plaintiff had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the defendant's late admission resulted in a substantial increase in costs.

The court found that the defendant's late admission of the de facto relationship did not significantly increase the plaintiff's costs. The court held that the principle of costs following the event applied, meaning that the unsuccessful party should pay the successful party's costs. Therefore, the plaintiff was not entitled to indemnity costs, and the defendant was entitled to their costs on the ordinary basis. The plaintiff was ordered to pay the defendant's costs.