The Court declined to award indemnity costs following rejection of a Calderbank offer that amounted to a demand to capitulate, made at a very early stage of judicial review proceedings before written submissions were filed. The Court held that refusal was not unreasonable where the standing argument raised in the offer was ultimately resolved in the applicants' favour, the case involved novel issues under the Liquor Act 1992 (Qld), and the case had a degree of complexity. The Court also observed that in judicial review proceedings, compromise offers will almost inevitably amount to demands to capitulate, making departure from the usual costs rule on that basis alone difficult to justify.
The full text is available to signed-in members.