TAYLOR AND ANOR V BANK OF NEW ZEALAND AND ANOR HC CHCH CIV 2008-409-000964

TAYLOR AND ANOR V BANK OF NEW ZEALAND AND ANOR HC CHCH CIV 2008-409-000964

The application for further security for costs was dismissed because ordering substantial additional security risked denying access to justice by potentially aborting a genuine claim; the first plaintiff was legally aided and the litigation would continue regardless, the second plaintiffs' claim had sufficient merit...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
openlaw-1dca4818_5b23_4bd8_9f99_f077af576f18.pdf
Parties
First Plaintiff: David John Taylor; Second Plaintiffs: David John Taylor, Alison Margaret Taylor and Alan Anthony Philip Perry as trustees of the D J Taylor Family Trust; First Defendant: Bank of New Zealand; Second Defendants: Neville Petrie Fagerlund and Michael John Keyse
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
25 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Litigation (security for Costs Application) / Interlocutory Application (hearing on Security for Costs)
Outcome
Application for further security for costs dismissed; costs awarded to the second plaintiffs on a 2B basis.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Impecuniosity, Access to Justice, Guarantee, Receivership, Trustees' Liability
Civil Procedure Trusts Law Banking Law Contract Law Security for Costs Impecuniosity Access to Justice Guarantee +2 more

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David John Taylor

First Plaintiff

David John Taylor, Alison Margaret Taylor and Alan Anthony Philip Perry as trustees of the D J Taylor Family Trust

Second Plaintiffs

Bank of New Zealand

First Defendant

Neville Petrie Fagerlund and Michael John Keyse

Second Defendants

Procedural Posture

Civil Litigation (security for Costs Application) / Interlocutory Application (hearing on Security for Costs)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether further security for costs should be ordered against the second plaintiffs
  2. 2 Whether ordering security would effectively deny access to the courts to genuine litigants
  3. 3 Whether trustees are legally obliged to fund trust litigation from their personal assets

Ratio Decidendi

The application for further security for costs was dismissed because ordering substantial additional security risked denying access to justice by potentially aborting a genuine claim; the first plaintiff was legally aided and the litigation would continue regardless, the second plaintiffs' claim had sufficient merit to warrant being heard, and overall the balance did not favour additional security.

Court Disposition

Application for further security for costs dismissed; costs awarded to the second plaintiffs on a 2B basis.

Orders

  • Application for further security for costs dismissed
  • Costs awarded to the second plaintiffs on a 2B basis