DSL LOGISTICS LIMITED V NEW ZEALAND SPORTS MERCHANDISING LIMITED SC 6/2010
Leave to appeal was refused because any potential error by the Court of Appeal regarding allocation of delivery charges did not so undermine its reasoning as to produce a substantial miscarriage of justice, there was no novel question of general principle, and the Court of Appeal provided sufficient reasons to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- SC 6/2010
- Parties
- Applicant: DSL Logistics Limited; Respondent: New Zealand Sports Merchandising Limited
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 30 March 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court / Leave Application Decided by Supreme Court
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Contract Interpretation, Entire Contract/entire Obligations Doctrine, Termination and Payment Obligations, Costs Awards
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
DSL Logistics Limited
Applicant
New Zealand Sports Merchandising Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court / Leave Application Decided by Supreme Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Interpretation of payment clause governing warehouseman after termination
- 2 Whether Court of Appeal misapplied Appendices A and B in allocating delivery charges
- 3 Whether any error produced a substantial miscarriage of justice warranting leave to appeal
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to appeal was refused because any potential error by the Court of Appeal regarding allocation of delivery charges did not so undermine its reasoning as to produce a substantial miscarriage of justice, there was no novel question of general principle, and the Court of Appeal provided sufficient reasons to dispose of the matter.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Orders
- Leave to appeal dismissed
- Costs of $2500 awarded to the respondent
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
DSL LOGISTICS LIMITED V NEW ZEALAND SPORTS MERCHANDISING LIMITED SC 6/2010 30 March 2010IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND SC 6/2010 [2010] NZSC 29BETWEEN DSL LOGISTICS LIMITED Applicant AND NEW ZEALAND SPORTS MERCHANDISING LIMITED Respondent Court: Elias CJ, Blanchard and McGrath JJ Counsel: M J Fisher for Applicant A R Galbraith QC for Respondent Judgment: 30 March 2010JUDGMENT OF THE COURTThe application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs of $2500 to the respondent. REASONS[1] This application for leave to appeal is in a proceeding about the interpretation of a clause governing the basis of payment to a warehouseman (DSL) after it exercised a contractual right to terminate a storage contract by a period of notice. [2] Although the Court of Appeal may possibly have been in error in thinking that the costs of delivering the goods from the warehouse to customers of NZSML were to be charged for under Appendix B of the contract (whereas in fact they seem to have been separately charged for under Appendix A) we do not consider that so far undermines the reasoning of the Court of Appeal as to demonstrate that there may have been a substantial miscarriage of justice. It was not obviously wrong in the view it took.[3] Nor does there appear to be any question of general principle of contract law or appellate procedure raising any seriously arguable issue. The law on entire contracts or entire obligations under contracts is well settled. It was submitted for the applicant that a clause of the kind in dispute is common in the industry but no evidence has been provided to support that assertion. The argument that the Court of Appeal was obliged to deal with all the arguments put up by DSL when in fact it gave quite full reasons for its conclusions is unconvincing. The reasons given were sufficient to dispose of the appeal.Solicitors: Castle Brown, Auckland for Applicant Lee Salmon Long, Auckland for Respondent