BODY CORPORATE 341188 V DISTRICT COURT AT AUCKLAND HC AK CIV-2012-404-2931

BODY CORPORATE 341188 V DISTRICT COURT AT AUCKLAND HC AK CIV-2012-404-2931

The High Court granted the interim relief sought in paragraphs 1(a)-(c) of the applicants' application dated 28 May 2012, endorsed the judgment delivery time in accordance with r 11.5, and awarded costs in favour of the applicants on a 2B basis.

Citation
openlaw-76b99d8e_48ff_41d1_81b5_626762ce933b.pdf
Parties
First Applicant: BODY CORPORATE 341188; Second Eleventh Applicants: GEORGE VICTOR WILKINSON AND JEREMY K COLLINGE & ORS; First Respondent: DISTRICT COURT AT AUCKLAND; Second Respondent: ESCROW HOLDINGS FORTY-ONE LIMITED; Third Respondent: KALLINA LIMITED; Fourth Respondent: AUCKLAND COUNCIL
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
13 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Judicature Amendment Act 1972 Proceeding / Interim Injunction Application (interlocutory)
Outcome
Interim orders granted; costs awarded to applicants; delivery time endorsed.
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Costs (2 B Scale), High Court Rules R 11.5 Endorsement
Civil Procedure Judicial Review Injunctions Interim Injunctions Costs (2 B Scale) High Court Rules R 11.5 Endorsement

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BODY CORPORATE 341188

First Applicant

GEORGE VICTOR WILKINSON AND JEREMY K COLLINGE & ORS

Second Eleventh Applicants

DISTRICT COURT AT AUCKLAND

First Respondent

ESCROW HOLDINGS FORTY-ONE LIMITED

Second Respondent

KALLINA LIMITED

Third Respondent

AUCKLAND COUNCIL

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicature Amendment Act 1972 Proceeding / Interim Injunction Application (interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interim orders/injunction should be granted
  2. 2 Whether costs should be awarded and on what basis
  3. 3 Endorsement of judgment delivery time under High Court Rules r 11.5

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court granted the interim relief sought in paragraphs 1(a)-(c) of the applicants' application dated 28 May 2012, endorsed the judgment delivery time in accordance with r 11.5, and awarded costs in favour of the applicants on a 2B basis.

Court Disposition

Interim orders granted; costs awarded to applicants; delivery time endorsed.

Orders

  • Orders in terms of paragraphs 1(a), (b) and (c) of the applicants' application for interim orders and/or injunction dated 28 May 2012 filed 29 May 2012
  • Costs awarded in favour of the applicants on a 2B basis