The Cost of Justice: When Settlement Offers Define Outcomes
In this follow-up episode of P.I. Case Note, we examine Stewart v Metro North Hospital and Health Service (No. 2) [2024] QSC 95, which addresses the critical issue of costs following the landmark medical negligence decision. The case demonstrates how rules 353, 361, and 681 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) operate to determine who pays legal costs based on settlement offers made during litigation.
The court’s costs analysis reveals the high-stakes nature of offer and settlement strategies in catastrophic injury cases. Despite winning substantial damages, the interplay between formal offers and final judgment amounts can dramatically affect the net recovery for injured plaintiffs. This decision provides essential lessons about the importance of carefully evaluating settlement offers, as rejecting an offer that exceeds the final judgment—even marginally—can result in paying the defendant’s costs from that point forward, potentially reducing compensation by hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Listen below for our expert analysis of costs, orders and settlement strategies in major injury claims. If you’re pursuing a medical negligence claim or any substantial injury case, understanding offer dynamics is crucial to maximising your net recovery. Contact accident legal for a free consultation—we’re skilled negotiators who understand when to accept offers and when to push forward to trial.