HELLABY RESOURCE SERVICES LIMITED v BODY CORPORATE 197281 [2023] NZHC 1684

HELLABY RESOURCE SERVICES LIMITED v BODY CORPORATE 197281 [2023] NZHC 1684

The application for 'unless' orders was premature and misconceived because there was no extant order in default nor history of non‑compliance; the Body Corporate had provided particulars 'so far as it was presently able', explained that remaining particulars depended on SRG's discovery, and after SRG served extensive discovery the Body Corporate provided the remaining particulars in the Third ASOC; accordingly SRG was not entitled to costs and the Body Corporate was entitled to costs on a scale 2B with reasonable disbursements.

Citation
[2023] NZHC 1684
Parties
First Plaintiff / Fourth Counterclaim Defendant: Hellaby Resource Services Limited; Second Plaintiff / First Counterclaim Defendant / Applicant in Interlocutory Proceedings: SRG Global Remediation Services (NZ) Limited; Defendant / Counterclaim Plaintiff / Respondent in Interlocutory Proceedings: Body Corporate 197281; Second Counterclaim Defendant: Maynard Marks Limited; Third Counterclaim Defendant: Hobanz Project Assist Limited
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
4 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil (interlocutory Applications and Costs) / Costs Judgment Following Interlocutory Applications (further Particulars and Security for Costs Applications)
Outcome
SRG's interlocutory application for 'unless' orders dismissed as premature; SRG required to pay Body Corporate 197281's costs of the application
Legal Topics
Unless Orders, Further Particulars, Strike Out, Security for Costs, Compliance With Case Management Directions
Civil Procedure Costs Pleadings Discovery Interlocutory Remedies Unless Orders Further Particulars Strike Out +2 more

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hellaby Resource Services Limited

First Plaintiff / Fourth Counterclaim Defendant

SRG Global Remediation Services (NZ) Limited

Second Plaintiff / First Counterclaim Defendant / Applicant in Interlocutory Proceedings

Body Corporate 197281

Defendant / Counterclaim Plaintiff / Respondent in Interlocutory Proceedings

Maynard Marks Limited

Second Counterclaim Defendant

Hobanz Project Assist Limited

Third Counterclaim Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (interlocutory Applications and Costs) / Costs Judgment Following Interlocutory Applications (further Particulars and Security for Costs Applications)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an 'unless' order was justified against the Body Corporate
  2. 2 Whether SRG was the successful party for costs purposes
  3. 3 Whether the Body Corporate was in default of any court order or direction

Ratio Decidendi

The application for 'unless' orders was premature and misconceived because there was no extant order in default nor history of non‑compliance; the Body Corporate had provided particulars 'so far as it was presently able', explained that remaining particulars depended on SRG's discovery, and after SRG served extensive discovery the Body Corporate provided the remaining particulars in the Third ASOC; accordingly SRG was not entitled to costs and the Body Corporate was entitled to costs on a scale 2B with reasonable disbursements.

Court Disposition

SRG's interlocutory application for 'unless' orders dismissed as premature; SRG required to pay Body Corporate 197281's costs of the application

Orders

  • SRG Global Remediation Services (NZ) Limited to pay Body Corporate 197281's costs of the Further Particulars application on a scale 2B basis and reasonable disbursements