Settlement offers on appeal : when might costs be awarded on the indemnity basis?

In Roberts v Prendergast [2013] QCA 89 the respondent had offered to settle the appeal, purporting to make the offer under Chapter 9 Part 5 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) (UCPR). Differing views were expressed in the Court of Appeal regarding the impact in the circumstances of the offer to settle, with the majority concluding that the appellant should pay the respondent’s costs on the standard basis.

Indemnity costs - whether indemnity costs can be ordered in Magistrates Court

In Asset Loan Management v Mamap Pty Ltd [2005] QDC 295, McGill DCJ held that costs may be recovered in Magistrates Courts on the indemnity basis. His Honour was satisfied his conclusion in this respect was not precluded by the decision of the Court of Appeal in Beardmore v Franklins Management Services Pty Ltd [2002] QCA 60

Costs order against company in liquidation unlikely to be effective indemnity

In Kimtran v Downie [2003] QCA 424, the Queensland Court of Appeal allowed an appeal from the decision of a District Court judge who had ordered costs against a non-party liquidator. It held that the court's decision in relation to the awarding of costs against a liquidator was not constrained by the decision of the of the Court of Appeal in Mahaffey v Belar Pty Ltd [1999] QCA 2 in the manner stated in the District Court.

Should the court direct that costs ordered to be recovered on the indemnity basis be assessed by reference to a costs agreement between the successful party and their solicitors?

The decision in Hook v Boreham & QBE Insurance (Australia) Limited [2006] QDC 304 considered whether the court should go further than order that costs be assessed on the indemnity basis, but should also specify the basis by which those indemnity costs should be determined. The decision makes it clear that under r704(3) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules, questions of that nature are ordinarily preserved to the discretion of the Registrar.

Professional indemnity insurance, performance and pre-emptive negligence: The impact of ‘non-claims’

As part of Australian licensing requirements professional valuers are required to maintain a level of professional indemnity insurance. A core feature of any insurance cover is that the insured has an obligation to notify their insurer of both actual and potential claims. An actual claim clearly will impact upon future policies and premiums paid. Notification of a potential claim, whether or not the notification crystallises into an actual claim, also can have an impact upon the insured’s claims history and premiums. The Global Financial Crisis continues to impact upon business practices and land transactions both directly and indirectly. The Australian valuation profession is not exempt from this impact. One example of this ongoing impact is reflected in a worrying practice engaged in by some financial institutions in respect of their loan portfolios. That is, even though the mortgagor is not in default, some institutions are pre-emptively issuing notices of demand regarding potential losses. Further, in some instances such demands are based only on mass appraisal valuations without specific consideration being given to the individual lot in question. The author examines the impact of this practice for the valuation profession and seeks to provide guidance for the appropriate handling of such demands.

Nathan Prince's pledge of indemnity towards Henry Prentice and Mary Prentice, ca. 1742

Although the context of this document is not entirely clear, it appears that the Prentices were responsible for storing Prince's belongings – recently removed from his Harvard chamber – until he could claim them. These included his "wearing linnen," "wearing cloathe & five or six papers," and "five or six books."

Rates and values, Modified life, preferred, select, endowment at age 60, 65, 70, preferred, select, ordinary, special; corresponding premiums for disability and double indemnity.

Mode of access: Internet.

I. Spanish spoliations, 1795. II. French indemnity, 1803. III. French indemnity, 1831.

"Notes on some of the questions decided by the Board of Commissioners under the convention with France, of 4th July 1831" [by John Kane]: p. [377]-442.

A sketch of the claims of sundry American citizens on the government of the United States, for indemnity, for depredations committed on their property by the French, (prior to the 30th of September, 1800) ...

Forty-three papers which appeared originally in the Baltimore chronicle, signed, A claimant.

Statement of indemnity and average in cooperative bovine brucellosis work /

Description based on: May 1955; title from caption.

Indemnity Bonds for National Banks : hearings before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on S. 2915, Seventy-Third Congress, second session, on Mar. 24, 27, 1934.

Considers (73) S. 2915.

A commentary on nuclear liability insurance and indemnity. Prepared for the Committee on Insurance and the Committee on Legal Problems,

Mode of access: Internet.