The Queensland Court of Appeal held that a Calderbank offer representing only approximately five per cent of the judgment sum and post-judgment interest was not a sufficiently substantial compromise, and the bank's rejection of it was not unreasonable, so indemnity costs were refused. The Court also held that disparity in wealth between the parties is not, of itself, a special or unusual circumstance justifying departure from standard costs. On the notice of contention that proved unnecessary to determine because the appeal was dismissed, the Court ordered the unsuccessful appellant to pay the respondents' costs of the notice of contention, reasoning that the respondents were entitled to raise viable protective arguments and had not acted unreasonably in doing so.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.