In Healy-Upright v Bradley and another – Butterworths Law Direct 3.11.07 it was held that an order for indemnity costs could not be justified merely by the fact that a party's case was found to have been wrong in fact or law, or that the position adopted had, in hindsight, been unreasonable. Moreover, parties were not to be discouraged from compromising actions prior to trial by the prospect that such a compromise would lead to a penal costs order being imposed upon them. In order for such a costs order to be imposed, the conduct of the party had to have been something out of the ordinary.