A party's failure to call an available witness at arbitration due to lack of due diligence (as opposed to deliberate tactical withholding) may justify ordering that party to pay costs from the date of the rehearing application, but does not justify ordering it to pay costs of the arbitration itself or costs on an indemnity basis. The distinction between deliberate tactical withholding and bona fide failure of due diligence is critical to the scope of any departure from the usual costs rule. Conduct that is imprudent but bona fide does not meet the 'plainly unreasonable' threshold for indemnity costs.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 37 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 37 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.