Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Edwards v Nine Network Australia Pty Limited (No 6) [2024] FCA 758 File number(s): NSD 129 of 2022
Judgment of: WIGNEY J
Date of judgment: 20 June 2024
Catchwords: COSTS – Application for indemnity costs by successful applicant in defamation proceeding – where applicant made valid offer of compromise – where terms of the judgment were more favourable than the offer – whether rejection of applicant's offer unreasonable – whether Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) s 40 'picked up' in federal jurisdiction – whether indemnity costs should be determined on an issue-by-issue basis – whether adverse credibility findings are relevant to apportionment of costs – indemnity costs awarded
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 37M, 37N, 43 Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 79 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 1.35, 25.01, 25.14, 40.01, 40.02, Sch 1 Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) ss 3, 25, 40
Cases cited: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v The Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (No 4) [2018] FCA 684 Bellino v Queensland Newspapers Pty Ltd (No 2) [2019] FCA 1691 Black v Lipovac [1998] FCA 699 Bostik Australia Pty Ltd v Liddiard (No 2) [2009] NSWCA 304 Calderbank v Calderbank [1976] Fam 93 Chevron Australia Holdings Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation (No 5) [2015] FCA 1310 Cirillo v Consolidated Press Property Ltd (formerly known as Citicorp Australia Ltd) (No 2) [2007] FCA 179 Cretazzo v Lombardi (1975) 13 SASR 4 Dukemaster Pty Ltd v Bluehive Pty Ltd [2003] FCAFC 1 Edwards v Nine Network Australia Pty Limited (No 5) [2024] FCA 422 Edwards v Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2022] FCA 1332 Firebird Global Master Fund II Ltd v Republic of Nauru (No 2) [2015] HCA 53; (2015) 90 ALJR 270 Hamod v New South Wales (2002) 188 ALR 659; [2002] FCAFC 97 Hanson-Young v Leyonhjelm (No 5) [2020] FCA 34 Hardingham v RP Data Pty Ltd (No 2) [2021] FCAFC 175 Hayson v Age Company Pty Ltd (No 3) (2020) 280 FCR 139; [2020] FCA 1163 Hazeldene's Chicken Farm Pty Ltd v Victorian WorkCover Authority (No 2) (2005) 13 VR 435; [2005] VSCA 298 Hill v Forteng Pty Ltd [2019] FCAFC 105 Hyndes v Nationwide News Pty Ltd [2012] NSWCA 349 JMC Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation (Costs) [2023] FCAFC 95 JWR Productions Australia Pty Ltd v Duncan-Watt (No 3) [2020] FCA 528 Kazal v Independent Commission Against Corruption and Ors (No 2) [2020] NSWSC 17 King v Yurisich (No 2) [2007] Latoudis v Casey (1990) 170 CLR 534 Lehrmann v Network Ten Pty Ltd (Costs) [2024] FCA 486 LFDB v SM (No 2) [2017] FCAFC 207 Mango Boulevard Pty Ltd v Whitton [2015] FCA 1352 Marmax Investments Pty Ltd v RPR Maintenance Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] FCAFC 155 Melbourne City Investments Pty Ltd v Treasury Wine Estates Limited (No 2) [2017] FCAFC 116 Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Porter (No 3) [2022] FCA 998 Murphy v Nationwide News Pty Ltd (No 2) [2021] FCA 432 Palmer v McGowan (No 6) [2022] FCA 927 PKT Technologies Pty Ltd v Peter Vogel Instruments Pty Ltd (No 2) [2020] FCAFC 46 Russell v ABC (No 4) [2023] FCA 1279 Seven Network Ltd v News Ltd (2009) 182 FCR 160; [2009] FCAFC 166 Siemens WLL v BIC Contracting LLC (costs) [2024] FCA 201 Stead v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd (No 2) (2021) 386 ALR 237; [2021] FCA 65 The State of Victoria v Sportsbet Pty Ltd (No 2) [2012] FCAFC 174
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