Zepinic v Chateau Constructions (Aust) Ltd (No 4)

In the proceedings before Emmett JA, the applicants, Vito Zepinic and Milla Zepinic, sought to set aside or vary orders made for the payment of costs to the respondent, Chateau Constructions (Aust) Ltd. The dispute concerned the quantum of costs awarded and whether these awards should be on an indemnity basis, stemming from offers of compromise made by the respondent.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the offers of compromise made by the respondent complied with the requirements of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (UCPR) to justify an award of indemnity costs, and consequently, whether the gross sum of costs ordered to be paid by the applicants was appropriate.

Emmett JA considered the nature of the offers of compromise and the relevant rules governing their validity and effect on costs. The court's reasoning focused on the compliance of the respondent's offers with the UCPR, particularly in relation to the certainty and clarity required for such offers to attract the consequences of indemnity costs. The court applied principles concerning the interpretation of offers of compromise and the discretion of the court in awarding costs.

The court made orders in four separate proceedings. In proceedings 2013/302149, Vito Zepinic and Milla Zepinic were ordered to pay the respondent $67,000. In proceedings 2014/130563, Vito Zepinic was ordered to pay the respondent $15,000. In proceedings 2013/345739, Vito Zepinic was ordered to pay the respondent $50,000. Finally, in proceedings 2014/130569, Vito Zepinic was ordered to pay the respondent $18,000.