ALLOTT v COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE [2023] NZHC 57
The Court recorded the parties' agreed costs and disbursements by consent, made a Tomlin-style stay of further proceedings to permit enforcement of the agreed payment schedule, granted leave to the respondent to apply to carry the terms into effect, and declined to permit enforcement 'without further...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] NZHC 57
- Parties
- Applicant: Murray George Allott; Respondent: Commissioner of Inland Revenue
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 1 February 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Costs Determination
- Outcome
- By consent: costs awarded to respondent with detailed payment schedule; proceedings stayed except to carry terms into effect; leave granted to respondent to apply to give effect to terms; enforcement must be on notice.
- Legal Topics
- Removal of Tax Agency Status, Costs, Tomlin Order, Stay of Proceedings, Enforcement Procedure
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Murray George Allott
Applicant
Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Costs Determination
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant should be ordered to pay the respondent's costs following a substantially unsuccessful judicial review
- 2 Whether the costs orders should be made by consent as a Tomlin order with enforcement provision
- 3 Whether court should permit enforcement ‘without further notice’
Ratio Decidendi
The Court recorded the parties' agreed costs and disbursements by consent, made a Tomlin-style stay of further proceedings to permit enforcement of the agreed payment schedule, granted leave to the respondent to apply to carry the terms into effect, and declined to permit enforcement 'without further notice'—requiring any enforcement through the court to be on notice.
Court Disposition
By consent: costs awarded to respondent with detailed payment schedule; proceedings stayed except to carry terms into effect; leave granted to respondent to apply to give effect to terms; enforcement must be on notice.
Orders
- All further proceedings stayed except for the purpose of carrying the terms in the attached Schedule into effect
- Leave granted to the respondent to apply as to the carrying of such terms into effect
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
ALLOTT v COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE [2023] NZHC 57 [1 February 2023]IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALANDCHRISTCHURCH REGISTRYI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROAŌTAUTAHI ROHECIV-2021-409-546[2023] NZHC 57UNDER the Judicial Review Procedure Act 2016 andthe Tax Administration Act 1994IN THE MATTER of an application to review a decision toremove tax agency statusBETWEEN MURRAY GEORGE ALLOTTApplicantAND COMMISSIONER OF INLANDREVENUERespondentHearing: (Determined on the papers)Appearances: S G Lukey for ApplicantP Courtney and J W Henderson for RespondentJudgment: 1 February 2023JUDGMENT OF OSBORNE J(Costs)This judgment was delivered by me on 1 February 2023 at 3.30pursuant to Rule 11.5of the High Court Rules[1] The applicant's application for a judicial review was substantiallyunsuccessful.1Costs and disbursements[2] The parties have now reached agreement on the costs and disbursements to bepaid by the applicant to the respondent.[3] I will be making, by consent, the orders sought by the parties as to quantum.[4] I will be making the costs and disbursements orders as a Tomlin order, so thatthe respondent can take action through this proceeding to recover the agreed costs ifthey remain unpaid. That said, I will not be providing for the enforcement action tobe taken "without further notice to the applicant", as requested by the parties, as anyenforcement action through the court should be on notice.Order[5] I order by consent:(a) the applicant and the respondent, having agreed to the terms set forthin the attached Schedule, all further proceedings herein are stayed,except for the purpose of carrying such terms into effect; and(b) leave is granted to the respondent to apply as to the of carrying of suchterms into effect.Osborne JSolicitors:Corcoran French, ChristchurchCrown Law Office, WellingtonCC:Stephen Lukey, Barrister, ChristchurchPauline Courtney, Barrister, Wellington1 Allott v Commissioner of Inland Revenue [2022] NZHC 2832.SCHEDULE[1] The applicant shall pay to the respondent the costs and disbursements of thesubstantive judicial review proceeding fixed in the sum of $8,000, payable at $2,000weekly on 20 January 2023; 27 January 2023; 3 February 2023; and 10 February 2023.[2] The applicant shall pay to the respondent the interlocutory costs anddisbursements of the proceeding fixed in the sum of $15,000, payable at $1,500weekly on 17 February 2023; 24 February 2023; 3 March 2023; 10 March 2023;17 March 2023; 24 March 2023; 31 March 2023; and 7 April 2023; and at $1,000weekly payable on 14 April 2023; 21 April 2023; and 28 April 2023.[3] The respondent shall not before 1 April 2023 notify any of the applicant'sclients that the applicant's tax agency status has been revoked.