BELLIS V DISPUTES TRIBUNAL AND ANOR HC CHCH CIV-2007-409-000731
The application contained no public interest element and was essentially an attempt to appeal the Disputes Tribunal's merits decision; accordingly costs are awarded to the second defendant on a 2B basis and disbursements are to be fixed by the Registrar.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- openlaw-587338d6_ed79_49c3_b38a_81a1862a5855.pdf
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Bruce William Bellis; First Defendant: Disputes Tribunal; Second Defendant: Calder Stewart Industries Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 12 September 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Review of Disputes Tribunal Decision Under Judicature Amendment Act 1972 / Costs Determination Following Dismissed Review
- Outcome
- Costs awarded to the second defendant on a 2B scale; disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar.
- Legal Topics
- Review of Tribunal Decision, Costs on Scale, Public Interest in Litigation, Appeal Vs Review
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Bruce William Bellis
Plaintiff
Disputes Tribunal
First Defendant
Calder Stewart Industries Limited
Second Defendant
Procedural Posture
Review of Disputes Tribunal Decision Under Judicature Amendment Act 1972 / Costs Determination Following Dismissed Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether costs should be awarded to the second defendant
- 2 Whether a public interest element precludes an award of costs
- 3 Appropriate costs scale applicable (2B) and disbursements procedure
Ratio Decidendi
The application contained no public interest element and was essentially an attempt to appeal the Disputes Tribunal's merits decision; accordingly costs are awarded to the second defendant on a 2B basis and disbursements are to be fixed by the Registrar.
Court Disposition
Costs awarded to the second defendant on a 2B scale; disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar.
Orders
- Costs to Calder Stewart Industries Limited on a 2B basis
- Disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
BELLIS V DISPUTES TRIBUNAL AND ANOR HC CHCH CIV-2007-409-000731 12 September 2007IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CIV-2007-409-000731UNDER the Judicature Amendment Act 1972 IN THE MATTER OF a determination of the Disputes Tribunal at Christchurch BETWEEN BRUCE WILLIAM BELLIS Plaintiff AND DISPUTES TRIBUNAL First Defendant AND CALDER STEWART INDUSTRIES LIMITED Second Defendant Hearing: 29 August 2007 Appearances: Plaintiff appears In Person No Appearance for First Defendant ADG Hitchcock for Second Defendant Judgment: 12 September 2007JUDGMENT OF HON. JUSTICE JOHN HANSEN As to Costs[1] Mr Bellis sought to review the decision of the Disputes Tribunal. [2] In the Disputes Tribunal, the second defendant had written to the referee, but took no active steps in the hearing. [3] Mr Bellis was unsuccessful in his application for review. He submits that costs should lie where they fall because there was a public interest element to his application.[4] The second defendant submits that costs should be awarded in accordance with the scale. The appellant pointed out that Associate Judge Christiansen had categorised the proceedings as 2B. [5] I see no public interest element in this particular application for review. Essentially it was an attempt to appeal the finding of the Disputes Tribunal on the merits. [6] There will be costs to the second defendant on a 2B basis, together with disbursements as fixed by the Registrar.Solicitors: B W Bellis, Applicant AWS Legal for Second Defendant