New South Wales Court of Appeal CITATION : Musleh v Sabri [2003] NSWCA 215 HEARING DATE(S) : 30/07/03 JUDGMENT DATE : 30 July 2003 JUDGMENT OF : Meagher JA at 1; Sheller JA at 4; Ipp JA at 5 DECISION : 1. Leave to appeal granted, any necessary extension thereby being permitted; 2. The appeal is successful and in addition to the orders made below there is an order that the plaintiff pay the defendant's costs after 18 December 2000; 3. Costs of this application to be borne by the opponent. CATCHWORDS : COSTS - Offer of compromise not bettered by verdict at trial - Offeror's prima facie right to costs after date of offer. Ahmed J Musleh PARTIES : v Mahmoud Sabri FILE NUMBER(S) : CA 41095 of 2002 COUNSEL : Claimant: J D Hislop QC Opponent: In Person SOLICITORS : Claimant: Curwood & Partners Opponent: Stephen Smart & Associates LOWER COURT District Court JURISDICTION : LOWER COURT 000070/2000 FILE NUMBER(S) : LOWER COURT Williams DCJ JUDICIAL OFFICER : IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL CA 41095 of 2002 MEAGHER JA SHELLER JA IPP JA Wednesday, 30 July 2003 AHMED J MUSLEH v MAHMOUD SABRI Judgment 1 MEAGHER JA: In this matter, the plaintiff Mr Sabri, sued the defendant Mr Musleh for damages arising out of a motor car accident. Liability was admitted so there is no doubt that the defendant, Mr Musleh had to suffer a verdict against him. In due course his Honour heard the action and gave the plaintiff a verdict of nearly $120,000 against Mr Musleh. 2 None of the merits of the case is currently of any concern to this Court. What is of concern is a question of costs. In December 2000 the defendant's solicitor made an offer to compromise the case by making a payment in the sum of $180,000. That offer was not accepted. Prima facie, that gives the defendant the right to costs after that date. His Honour did not turn attention to this matter and neglected to make in favour of the defendant the order to which the defendant was entitled. It is on that question that the defendant now, as claimant, seeks leave to appeal. 3 The orders of the Court will be: 1. Leave to appeal granted, any necessary extension thereby being permitted. 2. The appeal is successful and in addition to the orders made below there is an order that the plaintiff pay the defendant's costs after 18 December 2000. 3. Costs of this application to be borne by the opponent. 4 SHELLER JA: I agree with Meagher JA. 5 IPP JA: I agree with Meagher JA. ***** Last Modified: 08/18/2003 DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.