The Court ordered costs to follow the event in the proceeding where the plaintiff was wholly successful in setting aside a statutory demand. In the related proceeding where the statutory demand was varied rather than set aside, the Court held that the defendants' offer of compromise (proposing variation to $250,000) was more favourable than the outcome achieved ($276,461), and that rejection of the offer was unreasonable. The offer, which proposed orders varying the demand in the plaintiff's favour with the originating process 'otherwise dismissed', was properly characterised as proposing a judgment in favour of the plaintiff under UCPR r 42.13A(2), meaning acceptance would have entitled the plaintiff to its costs up to the date of the offer, negating the plaintiff's argument that the offer's silence on costs made rejection reasonable.
The full text is available to signed-in members.