Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Allergan Australia Pty Ltd v Self Care IP Holdings Pty Ltd (No 2) [2021] FCA 185 File numbers: NSD 15 of 2017 NSD 1802 of 2017
Judgment of: STEWART J
Date of judgment: 5 March 2021
Catchwords: COSTS – where costs were previously determined – whether costs order can be revisited pursuant to the slip rule in r 39.05(h) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – whether there was "an error arising in a judgment or order from an accidental slip or omission" – where costs had not previously been sought on an indemnity basis – where multiple Calderbank offers were made – whether unsuccessful party would have been in a better position had it accepted the offers – whether offers were unreasonably or impudently rejected – no basis to award costs on an indemnity basis – slip rule applied – previous costs order vacated – rough and ready allowance made for issues on which predominantly successful party was unsuccessful – costs awarded on a lump sum basis to be quantified by agreement or the Registrar
Legislation: Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) Sch 2 (Australian Consumer Law) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 43 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 22.03, 39.05(h), 39.05(e) Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 (Cth)
Cases cited: Allergan Australia Pty Ltd v Self Care IP Holdings Pty Ltd [2020] FCA 1530 Anchorage Capital Partners Pty Ltd v ACPA Pty Ltd (No. 2) [2018] FCAFC 112 Calderbank v Calderbank [1975] 3 WLR 586 CGU Insurance Ltd v Corrections Court of Australia Superannuation Ltd [2008] FCAFC 173 Chevron Australia Holdings Pty Ltd v Cmr of Taxation (No 5) [2015] FCA 1310 Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v Mammoet Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2012] FCA 1404 Cretazzo v Lombardi (1975) 13 SASR 4 DJL v The Central Authority [2000] HCA 17; 201 CLR 226 EMI Songs Australia Pty Ltd v Larrikin Music Publishing Pty Ltd [2011] FCAFC 92 Hammond v Quayeyeware Pty Ltd, in the matter of Quayeyeware Pty Ltd [2019] FCA 2207; 141 ACSR 434 Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd v Rinehart (No 3) [2021] FCAFC 23 Marmax Investments Pty Ltd v RPR Maintenance Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] FCAFC 155 Notaras v Barcelona Pty Ltd (No 2) [2019] FCA 617 Owston Nominees No 2 Pty Limited v Branir Pty Ltd [2003] FCA 629; 129 FCR 558 Paciocco v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd (No 2) [2017] FCAFC 146; 253 FCR 403 Pantzer v Wenkart [2007] FCAFC 27 Polygram Records Inc v Raben Footwear Pty Ltd [1996] AIPC 91-284; 140 ALR 617 SZCZF v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2009] FCA 208; 107 ALD 138 Tropicana Ltd v Australasia Corporate Services Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 684 Victoria v Sportsbet Pty Ltd (No 2) [2012] FCAFC 174 Federal Court of Australia, Costs Practice Note (GPN-COSTS), 25 October 2016
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate