COSTS — party/party costs — orders when proceedings involve multiple parties — Bullock and Sanderson orders — where plaintiff successful against one defendant but unsuccessful against another — where plaintiff seeks Sanderson order — whether unsuccessful defendant should be ordered to pay costs payable by plaintiff to the successful defendant — whether plaintiff should be ordered to pay costs of the successful defendant
Quick Take
1A Sanderson order requires both that it was reasonable for the plaintiff to sue the successful defendant and that there was something in the unsuccessful defendant's conduct making it fair to impose liability for the successful defendant's costs — a mere denial of liability is insufficient.
2On the facts, although it was reasonable for the plaintiff to join the third defendant given uncertainty about vicarious liability for the driver, the second defendant did not positively encourage the joinder, and the second defendant's defence was not unarguable, so the discretion was not exercised in the plaintiff's favour.
3In balancing the policy considerations, the size of the judgment meant the plaintiff would not be deprived of the fruits of victory by bearing the successful defendant's costs.
