MICHAEL JOHN SCANDLE V FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL AND ANOR HC AK CIV 2008-488-203

MICHAEL JOHN SCANDLE V FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL AND ANOR HC AK CIV 2008-488-203

Because the defendant withdrew the summary judgment application after full consideration of the plaintiff's evidence and the plaintiff had not complied with High Court Rules timing, the circumstances were not exceptional and the normal NZI Bank principle applies; therefore costs of the application are reserved pending the substantive hearing.

Citation
openlaw-86b13a17_c624_466c_8eeb_eb00bf4e638d.pdf
Parties
Plaintiff: Michael John Scandle; First Defendant: Far North District Council; Second Defendants: Corina Lili Mullane and Michael James Mullane as Trustees of the Mullane Family Trust
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
11 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Negligence (building) / Application for Summary Judgment Withdrawn; Costs Reserved Pending Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Costs reserved in relation to the defendant's withdrawn summary judgment application; no immediate costs order
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Duty of Care, Notice to Rectify, Costs on Withdrawal, Abuse of Process, Statutory Inspections
Civil Procedure Negligence Building Law Costs Summary Judgment Duty of Care Notice to Rectify Costs on Withdrawal +2 more

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael John Scandle

Plaintiff

Far North District Council

First Defendant

Corina Lili Mullane and Michael James Mullane as Trustees of the Mullane Family Trust

Second Defendants

Procedural Posture

Civil Negligence (building) / Application for Summary Judgment Withdrawn; Costs Reserved Pending Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should be awarded to the plaintiff on withdrawal of the defendant's summary judgment application
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's summary judgment application amounted to an abuse of process
  3. 3 Application of NZI Bank Ltd v Philpott principles to costs on interlocutory hearings

Ratio Decidendi

Because the defendant withdrew the summary judgment application after full consideration of the plaintiff's evidence and the plaintiff had not complied with High Court Rules timing, the circumstances were not exceptional and the normal NZI Bank principle applies; therefore costs of the application are reserved pending the substantive hearing.

Court Disposition

Costs reserved in relation to the defendant's withdrawn summary judgment application; no immediate costs order

Orders

  • Costs reserved in respect of the defendant's application for summary judgment
  • Costs incidental to this costs application reserved