TFAC LIMITED AND ANOR V DAVID AND ANOR HC AK CIV-2006-404-3984

TFAC LIMITED AND ANOR V DAVID AND ANOR HC AK CIV-2006-404-3984

Plaintiffs succeeded on a s 9 Fair Trading Act claim but failed on numerous other allegations which significantly increased defendants' costs; applying r 48D the Court exercised its discretion to reduce the defendants' recoverable costs by 25%, disallowed unnecessary expert fees and held the Calderbank offer did not justify indemnity costs because plaintiffs pursued and obtained a larger judgment.

Citation
openlaw-3196bcca_131c_4e2e_aea1_8823d9c37526.pdf
Parties
First Plaintiff: TFAC LIMITED; Second Plaintiffs: GEOFFREY ALAN GRISDALE AND AMANDA MARY GRISDALE; First Defendant: SUSAN ELIZABETH DAVID; Second Defendant: UAR LIMITED
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
5 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Dispute Under Fair Trading Act 1986 and Contractual Remedies Act 1979 / Costs Judgment (post Trial)
Outcome
Plaintiffs awarded costs and disbursements totalling $24,821.75 to be added to the judgment in their favour.
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Restitutionary and Expectation Damages, Calderbank Offers, Costs Proportionality Under R 48 D, Recoverability of Expert Fees
Fair Trading Contract Law Civil Procedure Costs Law Restitution Misrepresentation Restitutionary and Expectation Damages Calderbank Offers +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 6 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TFAC LIMITED

First Plaintiff

GEOFFREY ALAN GRISDALE AND AMANDA MARY GRISDALE

Second Plaintiffs

SUSAN ELIZABETH DAVID

First Defendant

UAR LIMITED

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Dispute Under Fair Trading Act 1986 and Contractual Remedies Act 1979 / Costs Judgment (post Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants breached s 9 Fair Trading Act by representations about James Homes Services' success in New Zealand
  2. 2 Whether plaintiffs should recover costs and in what amount following mixed success at trial
  3. 3 Effect of plaintiffs' Calderbank offer on costs entitlement

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiffs succeeded on a s 9 Fair Trading Act claim but failed on numerous other allegations which significantly increased defendants' costs; applying r 48D the Court exercised its discretion to reduce the defendants' recoverable costs by 25%, disallowed unnecessary expert fees and held the Calderbank offer did not justify indemnity costs because plaintiffs pursued and obtained a larger judgment.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs awarded costs and disbursements totalling $24,821.75 to be added to the judgment in their favour.

Orders

  • Defendants to pay plaintiffs costs and disbursements of $24,821.75, to be added to the plaintiffs' judgment.