Steicke v Pederick (No 2)

The applicant, Steicke, appealed a decision concerning costs against the respondents, Pederick. The dispute centred on whether the respondents should be ordered to pay the applicant's costs of an appeal on an indemnity basis, rather than the usual party and party basis. The appeal was heard by Kelly, Nicholson, and Lovell JJ.

The primary legal issue before the Full Court was whether the circumstances of the appeal justified departing from the general rule that costs are awarded on a party and party basis. Specifically, the court had to determine if the applicant's conduct or the nature of the appeal warranted the more generous indemnity costs.

The court found that while the application for costs on an indemnity basis lacked merit, it did not meet the threshold for departing from the general rule. The judges applied the principle that indemnity costs are an exception to the norm and require exceptional circumstances, which were not present in this instance. Consequently, the court ordered that the applicant pay the respondents' costs of the appeal, to be assessed on a party and party basis unless otherwise agreed.