Background:
Mary Reynolds and Deep Water Recovery Ltd. (DWR), led by Mark Jurisich, were in a legal dispute arising from Ms. Reynolds’s use of a drone. Ms. Reynolds flew the drone over DWR’s property to capture footage of its shipbreaking operations. DWR counterclaimed, alleging nuisance, trespass, invasion of privacy, and reputational harm. Ms. Reynolds argued that the counterclaim was a SLAPP suit, aimed at silencing her public criticism of DWR's environmental impact. She filed an application under the Protection of Public Participation Act (PPPA) to dismiss parts of the counterclaim.

Key Legal Issues:
The central legal issues were whether DWR’s counterclaim constituted a SLAPP suit and whether Ms. Reynolds should be protected under the PPPA. The court had to determine the extent of success for each party in the dismissal application and assess costs accordingly.

Divided Success:
The court found that Ms. Reynolds was two-thirds successful, having key claims of punitive damages, reputational harm, and business loss dismissed. However, DWR succeeded in keeping its claims for nuisance, trespass, and privacy violations, focusing on the drone's interference with its property.

Costs Awarded:

• Ms. Reynolds: Awarded two-thirds of her costs on a full indemnity basis.
• DWR: Awarded one-third of its costs on a party-and-party basis (Scale B) in the cause.

Final Costs Award:
Both parties bore their own costs for the hearing day.