NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Smith v Brambles Australia Ltd [2011] NSWSC 1518 Hearing dates: 18 November 2011 Decision date: 09 December 2011 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Schmidt J Decision: As Concerns the First Defendant ('Brambles'): 1. Verdict and Judgment in favour of the Plaintiff against the First Defendant ('Brambles') for damages ($784,254.26) and interest ($42,818.00) in the sum of $827,072.26. 2. On the First Cross-Claim Verdict and Judgment in favour of Brambles against the Second Defendant ('Baden') in the sum of (45% x $827,072.26) $372,182.51. 3. On the Third Cross-Claim Verdict and Judgment in favour of Brambles as against the third Defendant ('Gillespies') in the sum of (20% of $520,785.00) $104,157.00. 4. Brambles to pay the Plaintiff's costs on a party/party basis. 5. In any event, the total liability of Brambles on the Second and Fourth Cross-Claims is not to exceed (35% of $827,072.26) $289,475.29, plus costs. As Concerns the Second Defendant ('Baden') 6. Verdict and Judgment in favour of the Plaintiff against the Second Defendant ('Baden') for damages ($784,254.26) and interest ($42,818.00) in the sum of $827,072.26. 7. On the Second Cross-Claim Verdict and Judgment in favour of Baden against Brambles in the sum of (35% x $827,072.26) $289,475.29. 8. On the Fifth Cross-Claim Verdict and Judgment in favour of Baden as against Gillespies in the sum of (20% of $520,785.00) $104,157.00. 9. Baden to pay the Plaintiff's costs on a party/party basis. 10. In any event the total liability of Baden on the First and Fourth Cross-Claims is not to exceed (45% of $827,072.26) $372,182.51, plus costs. As Concerns the Third Defendant ('Gillespies') 11. Verdict and Judgement in favour of the Plaintiff as against the Third Defendant ('Gillespies') for damages in the sum of $520,786.00. 12. Gillespies is to have credit for payments made to for or on behalf of the plaintiff pursuant to the Workers Compensation Act 1987 in the sum of $194,245.29. 13. The Plaintiff otherwise is to repay the Third Defendant's workers compensation insurer Gallagher Bassett Services Pty Ltd pursuant to section 151Z(1)(b) the sum of $194,245.29. 14. On the Fourth Cross-Claim Verdict and Judgment in favour of Gillespies as against Brambles in the sum of (35% of $520,785.00) $182,274.75. 15. On the Fourth Cross-Claim Verdict and Judgment in favour of Gillespies as against Baden in the sum of (45% of $520,785.00) $234,353.25. 16. In any event the total liability of Gillespies on the Third and Fifth Cross-Claims is not to exceed (20% of $520,785) $104,157.00 which, taking into account repayment of Workers Compensation, provides for a net repayment to Gillespies or to Gallagher Bassett Services Pty Limited of $90,088.29. 17. Gillespies to pay the Plaintiff's costs in accordance with provisions of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 and Workplace Injury Management Act 1998 as assessed or agreed. Catchwords: PROCEDURE - costs - departing from the general rule - whether indemnity costs order should be made - offers of compromise - Calderbank offers - orders Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 Workers Compensation Act 1987 Workplace Injury Management Act 1998 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 Cases Cited: Commonwealth of Australia v Gretton [2008] NSWCA 117 Smith v Brambles Australia Ltd [2011] NSWSC 963 Category: Costs Parties: Craig Lionel Smith (Plaintiff) Brambles Australia Limited (First Defendant) Baden Cranes Pty Limited formerly GM Baden Pty Limited (Second Defendant) Gillespies Cranes Nominees Pty Limited t/as Gillespies Crane Services (Third Defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr H Kelly SC with Mr T McKenzie, counsel (Plaintiff) Mr R Seton SC (First Defendant) Mr G Curtin SC with Mr D Macfarlane (Second Defendant) Mr S Kettle, counsel (Third Defendant) Solicitors: Taylor & Scott Lawyers (Plaintiff) McCabe Terrill Lawyers (First Defendant) Riley Gray-Spencer Lawyers (Second Defendant) Hicksons (Third Defendant) File Number(s): 2006/267240 Publication restriction: None
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