Sutton v Hunter (No 2)
[2021] QSC 268 · Freeburn J
This was a separate costs decision following an earlier judgment in which Ms Sutton, who was injured in a motor vehicle accident, was awarded $314,345 in damages against the CTP insurer Allianz. Ms Sutton argued she should recover her costs on the higher 'indemnity' basis because she had earlier made a formal settlement offer of $310,000 — close to what she finally won. The court refused indemnity costs, finding the medical evidence had changed substantially since the offer and that some of her later claims (reaching nearly $2 million) were unrealistic. Because the award was well within the District Court's limit, costs were ordered on the District Court scale even though the case had been moved to the Supreme Court. The court also refused to make the insurer pay for the cost of the transfer application and an expert accounting report (from Vincent's Accountants) that had been ruled mostly inadmissible at trial. The insurer was ordered to pay the plaintiff's ordinary costs subject to those exclusions.
Incident & injury
Motor vehicle accident
- Body regions
- Psychiatric
Quick facts
Outcome
Costs ruling following the plaintiff's successful damages award of $314,345. The court ordered the second defendant pay the plaintiff's standard costs on the District Court scale, but excluded the costs of the transfer application and of the largely-inadmissible Vincents expert report. Indemnity costs were refused.
Key issues
Sutton v Hunter (No 2) [2021] QSC 268
When typing in a Word document, italicise the case name. The copy button copies plain text suitable for any editor.