Spedding v State of New South Wales

In Spedding v State of New South Wales, the plaintiff, Spedding, sought damages for malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office, including collateral abuse of power, against the State of New South Wales. The case was heard by the Supreme Court of New South Wales, which was required to determine various legal issues concerning the interest on damages, the rate of interest claimed, the accrual of actions, and the indemnity costs.

The court addressed whether the plaintiff was bound to the rate of interest claimed during the substantive hearing. The plaintiff argued that they were not bound by the rate claimed in the substantive hearing as the defendant had not suffered any detrimental reliance. The court found that the plaintiff was not bound to the rate claimed and could adjust it as necessary. The court also considered the time at which the actions accrued, determining that the actions accrued when the plaintiff's rights were infringed, not when the damage was realised.

The court concluded that the plaintiff was entitled to interest on damages from the date of the substantive hearing until the date of judgment. The court found that the plaintiff was not bound to the rate of interest claimed in the substantive hearing due to the lack of detrimental reliance by the defendant. Furthermore, the court found that three offers of compromise made by the plaintiff were all no less favourable than the first offer, thus entitling the plaintiff to indemnity costs. The court found the first offer of compromise to be reasonable, rejecting the defendant's contention that it was not.

The final orders included an award of interest on damages from the date of the substantive hearing until the date of judgment, with the rate of interest to be determined by the court. The plaintiff was also awarded indemnity costs, including costs associated with the three offers of compromise.