Burnie Port Corporation Pty Ltd v Bank of Western Australia Limited & Anor

(2003) 12 Tas R 325; [2003] TASSC 132

Supreme Court of Tasmania

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › General rule — costs follow the event
4. › Costs of issues
5. › Whether successful party on some issues entitled to issue-based costs apportionment
6. › Whether issues sufficiently dominant or separable to warrant departure from general rule
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › Departing from the general rule
4. › Indemnity costs or solicitor/client costs
5. › Circumstances warranting departure
6. › Whether abandonment of claim during trial or alleged misconduct in pursuing proceedings justified indemnity costs order
7. › Supreme Court Civil Procedure Act 1932 (Tas), s 12

Quick Take

Abandonment of a monetary claim during trial does not of itself warrant indemnity or solicitor/client costs where the claim was a proper consequential claim and was not made frivolously or with ulterior motive. Where the dominant issue in litigation is clearly identifiable and the successful party on a minor issue lost on the major issues, issue-based costs apportionment is not warranted. The distinction between solicitor/client and indemnity costs under Tasmanian law remains unresolved.