BARTON v THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE [2018] NZCA 399

BARTON v THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE [2018] NZCA 399

Court granted both extensions because the appellant paid most of the required security and incarceration partly explained delay, the respondent was not prejudiced by the delay in filing the case on appeal, and the respondent is entitled to protection by security so the balance must be paid by a fixed date rather...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] NZCA 399
Parties
Appellant: David Simon Barton; Respondent: The Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
3 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (court of Appeal) / Application for Extension of Time to Pay Security for Costs and to File the Case on Appeal
Outcome
Applications granted
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Extension of Time, Appeal Procedure, Default Judgment, Tax Assessment, Bankruptcy Adjudication, Effect of Incarceration on Litigation
Tax Bankruptcy Criminal Law Civil Procedure Security for Costs Extension of Time Appeal Procedure Default Judgment +3 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Simon Barton

Appellant

The Commissioner of Inland Revenue

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (court of Appeal) / Application for Extension of Time to Pay Security for Costs and to File the Case on Appeal

  1. 1 Whether to grant extension of time to pay remaining security for costs
  2. 2 Whether to grant extension of time to file the case on appeal and to seek a hearing date
  3. 3 Whether security for costs should be reduced given partial payment and appellant's incarceration

Ratio Decidendi

Court granted both extensions because the appellant paid most of the required security and incarceration partly explained delay, the respondent was not prejudiced by the delay in filing the case on appeal, and the respondent is entitled to protection by security so the balance must be paid by a fixed date rather than reduced.

Court Disposition

Applications granted

Orders

  • Security for costs to be paid in full by 24 October 2018.
  • Case on appeal to be filed and a hearing date sought by 3 December 2018.