Former Victorian Police Association secretary Paul Mullett has been ordered to pay undisclosed costs to the state's former police chief Christine Nixon and two other senior officers over a three-year legal dispute.

Key points: Nixon, two other officers cleared of wrongdoing in August

Nixon, two other officers cleared of wrongdoing in August Court made cost order against Mullett, sum is undisclosed

Court made cost order against Mullett, sum is undisclosed Mullett 'unreasonably' refused a genuine officer to settle the case before trial

The Supreme Court ruled in Ms Nixon's favour in August and cleared her and two other officers of any wrongdoing over an alleged malicious prosecution of Mr Mullet.

He was suspended from Victoria Police in 2007 and accused of perjury and attempting to pervert the course of justice, although the charges were later dropped.

Mr Mullett claimed Ms Nixon and the other officers, former Deputy Commissioner Keiran Walshe and Superintendent Wayne Taylor, charged him with crimes that were never fully investigated in a campaign to have him sacked.

Justice Terry Forrest found Mr Mullett was a fierce adversary of Ms Nixon but the existence of a motive did not prove that she acted maliciously against him.

He has now ordered Mr Mullett to pay the legal fees of Ms Nixon and the two officers, but the judgement does not disclose a figure.

Allegations lacked evidence, judge said

Mr Mullett should have seen that his allegations lacked "evidentiary support" the judge said. ( ABC News )

Justice Forrest found Mr Mullett unreasonably refused a genuine offer to settle the case 11 days before the trial was due to start in April this year.

"I accept Mr Panna's [Mr Mullett's barrister] submission that the plaintiff believed in his case to the end," he said.

"However, subjective conviction on the part of the plaintiff is not sufficient to dislodge the reality that his prospects of success were bleak.

"In my view, rejection of the offer in these circumstances was unreasonable."

Under the offer, each party would have abandoned the case and covered their own costs, while up to $70,000 already awarded to the defendants would not have been pursued.

Justice Forrest said it should have become clear to Mr Mullett and his lawyers the allegations lacked evidence.

"The plaintiff's claim, in effect, was that beneath the cloak of the public service, the defendants had conspired to and had proceeded to maliciously suspend and prosecute him," Justice Forrest said.

"It should have become increasingly clear to the plaintiff and his advisors that his contentions lacked documentary or other evidentiary support."