Roberts v Prendergast

[2013] QCA 89

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › Appeals
4. › Indemnity costs
5. › Whether departure from standard basis justified
6. › Whether rejection of settlement offer was plainly unreasonable
7. › Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 766(1)(d)
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › Calderbank offers
4. › Offers to settle on appeal
5. › Whether offer not complying with Calderbank formalities may be treated as Calderbank offer
6. › Whether Chapter 9 Part 5 UCPR applies to appeals
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › Appeals
4. › Factors relevant to assessment of reasonableness of rejecting settlement offer
5. › Stage of proceeding
6. › Extent of compromise
7. › Prospects of success
8. › Whether offer foreshadowed indemnity costs application

Quick Take

An offer to settle an appeal that purports to be made under Chapter 9 Part 5 UCPR (which does not apply to appeals) and lacks Calderbank formalities may nonetheless be relevant to the costs discretion under r 766(1)(d), but is not decisive. The rejection of a settlement offer on appeal is not plainly unreasonable where the appellant could reasonably have concluded that general damages at large might be reduced below the offered amount. Section 40 of the Defamation Act 2005 (Qld) does not apply to appeals and cannot be applied by analogy.