M SPENCER V JED RICE BUILDING CONTRACTORS LIMITED HC AK CIV 2007-404-007539

M SPENCER V JED RICE BUILDING CONTRACTORS LIMITED HC AK CIV 2007-404-007539

Costs awarded to the successful respondent on the basis that the application was interlocutory; the appropriate scale items and time allowances for an interlocutory application were applied, the requested 10% uplift was rejected, and the modest amount at stake and offers to secure the debt did not justify reducing...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
openlaw-22cefdac_ebf2_461b_8a40_e7b3dfee52ef.pdf
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Mertsi Spencer; Defendant/applicant: Jed Rice Building Contractors Limited
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
1 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Companies Act 1993 Liquidation Application / Costs Decision on Interlocutory Application to Restrain Advertising and Stay
Outcome
Costs awarded to Mertsi Spencer for and incidental to Jed Rice's application to restrain and stay
Legal Topics
Liquidation, Statutory Demand, Interlocutory Relief, Costs Assessment, Court Rules
Company Law Civil Procedure Costs Liquidation Statutory Demand Interlocutory Relief Costs Assessment Court Rules

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

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

Parties

Mertsi Spencer

Plaintiff/respondent

Jed Rice Building Contractors Limited

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Companies Act 1993 Liquidation Application / Costs Decision on Interlocutory Application to Restrain Advertising and Stay

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should be awarded for the interlocutory application to restrain and stay
  2. 2 Appropriate scale and time allowances for an interlocutory application versus an originating application
  3. 3 Whether an uplift is warranted for unreasonable refusal to agree to costs

Ratio Decidendi

Costs awarded to the successful respondent on the basis that the application was interlocutory; the appropriate scale items and time allowances for an interlocutory application were applied, the requested 10% uplift was rejected, and the modest amount at stake and offers to secure the debt did not justify reducing costs for the interlocutory application.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to Mertsi Spencer for and incidental to Jed Rice's application to restrain and stay

Orders

  • Award costs to Mertsi Spencer in the sum of $2,080 being 1.3 days at $1,600 per day for Jed Rice's interlocutory application to restrain and stay