1Where a settlement offer complying with ss 113–114 of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 is rejected and the final orders are not more favourable to the offeree than the offer, the onus shifts to the offeree to demonstrate it was not unreasonable to reject the offer; a complete capitulation offer addressing the heart of the complaint will be difficult to justify rejecting.
2Indemnity costs may be awarded where the proceeding was conducted in a vexatious manner — being conduct productive of serious or unjustified trouble or harassment — even where the underlying claim was not hopeless, applying State of Victoria v Bradto Pty Ltd [2006] VCAT 1813.
3On the facts, conduct including sending over 2,711 emails, engaging eight experts but calling only one, pursuing unmeritorious collateral proceedings, making personal criticisms, and repeatedly seeking to set aside successive settlement agreements on spurious grounds was found to constitute vexatious conduct justifying a special costs order.
