Specsavers Pty Ltd v The Optical Superstore Pty Ltd (No 4) [2012] FCA 652

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Specsavers Pty Ltd v The Optical Superstore Pty Ltd (No 4) [2012] FCA 652 Citation: Specsavers Pty Ltd v The Optical Superstore Pty Ltd (No 4) [2012] FCA 652

Parties: SPECSAVERS PTY LTD (ACN 097 147 932) v THE OPTICAL SUPERSTORE PTY LTD (ACN 095 737 894), OPTOM ADMIN PTY LTD (ACN 101 150 449), WILLIAM CHIN, NORTHERN COAST OPTICAL PTY LTD (ACN 006 873 758), TOWNSVILLE OPTICAL PTY LTD (ACN 097 398 019), BUNDABERG OPTICAL PTY LTD (ACN 131 317 676), UNIQUE EYEWEAR PTY LTD (ACN 006 251 305) and IPSWICH OPTICAL PTY LTD (ACN 082 352 350)

File number: NSD 119 of 2010

Judge: KATZMANN J

Date of judgment: 21 June 2012

Catchwords: COSTS – claim for damages under an undertaking – amount initially claimed a fraction of amount awarded – whether parties claiming under undertaking were successful – whether costs should be reduced because of size of award – Federal Court Rules 2011 r 40.08 – multiple offers of compromise made by party providing undertaking without any response – party failed to act consistently with overarching purpose under Federal Court Act 1976 (Cth), s 37N(1) – claim for indemnity costs based on final offer of compromise – ambiguity of terms of offer – whether claimant acted unreasonably

Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 37M(1), 37M(3), 37N(1), 43 Federal Court Rules 2011 rr 1.35, 25.14(1), 40.08

Cases cited: Brother Industries, Limited v Dynamics Supplies Pty Ltd [2008] FCA 126 Futuretronics.com.au Pty Ltd v Graphix Labels Pty Ltd [2009] FCAFC 40 Kooee Communications Pty Ltd v Primus Telecommunications Pty Ltd (No 2) [2011] FCAFC 141 Ruddock v Vadarlis (No 2) (2001) 115 FCR 229 Specsavers Pty Ltd v The Optical Superstore Pty Ltd (No 2) [2010] FCA 566 Specsavers Pty Ltd v The Optical Superstore Pty Ltd (No 3) [2012] FCA 504