FRANCINI DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED V SOUTHERN WASTE LIMITED AND ANOR HC CHCH CIV 2008-409-000197

FRANCINI DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED V SOUTHERN WASTE LIMITED AND ANOR HC CHCH CIV 2008-409-000197

Rule 5.45(3) requires the Court to specify whether security is to be paid into Court or given to the satisfaction of the Judge/Registrar; given the plaintiff's failure to provide satisfactory evidence supporting a third party guarantee and concerns about bona fides and enforceability, the Court ordered security of $30,000 to be paid into Court and stayed the proceeding until that payment was made.

Citation
openlaw-c29adb09_b9e7_48ea_abf4_9573fb4c16ef.pdf
Parties
Plaintiff: Francini Developments Limited; First Defendant: Southern Waste Limited; Second Defendant: Paul Alan Whitehead
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
18 February 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Security for Costs Application (related to Specific Performance Claim) / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
Security for costs ordered and proceeding stayed until security paid into Court
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Third Party Guarantee, Stay of Proceedings, Specific Performance, Costs Assessment
Civil Procedure Costs Contract Law Security for Costs Third Party Guarantee Stay of Proceedings Specific Performance Costs Assessment

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Francini Developments Limited

Plaintiff

Southern Waste Limited

First Defendant

Paul Alan Whitehead

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Security for Costs Application (related to Specific Performance Claim) / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered
  2. 2 Proper form/manner of security (cash into Court v third party guarantee)
  3. 3 Appropriate quantum of security

Ratio Decidendi

Rule 5.45(3) requires the Court to specify whether security is to be paid into Court or given to the satisfaction of the Judge/Registrar; given the plaintiff's failure to provide satisfactory evidence supporting a third party guarantee and concerns about bona fides and enforceability, the Court ordered security of $30,000 to be paid into Court and stayed the proceeding until that payment was made.

Court Disposition

Security for costs ordered and proceeding stayed until security paid into Court

Orders

  • Security for costs fixed at $30,000 to be paid into Court and held on deposit until further order of the Court
  • Payment into Court to be made by 12 March 2010