M J DAISLEY and SDD LIMITED v ARK CONTRACTORS LIMITED, P G KELLER and K E KELLER and THOMSON LAW [2016] NZHC 2300

M J DAISLEY and SDD LIMITED v ARK CONTRACTORS LIMITED, P G KELLER and K E KELLER and THOMSON LAW [2016] NZHC 2300

Security for costs was ordered because the plaintiff's limited and unsubstantiated financial evidence, outstanding judgment against him, lack of demonstrable income and uncertain value of claimed Ark shareholding showed he was likely unable to pay costs; accordingly the court ordered specific security payments and stayed the proceedings until paid; the proceeding was transferred to the Whangarei Registry under HCR 5.1 because Ark was controlled and managed from Whangarei and most parties and witnesses are located there; the proceeding is to be case managed with CIV 2016-488-041 and heard sequentially.

Citation
[2016] NZHC 2300
Parties
First Plaintiff: M J Daisley; Second Plaintiff: SDD Limited; First Defendant: Ark Contractors Limited; Second Defendants: P G Keller and K E Keller; Third Defendant: Thomson Wilson Law
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
28 September 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Applications for Security for Costs, Transfer of Registry and Case Management/consolidation
Outcome
Security for costs ordered; proceedings stayed until security paid; proceeding transferred to Whangarei Registry; to be case managed with CIV 2016-488-041 and heard sequentially; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Transfer of Registry, Consolidation/case Management, Protest to Jurisdiction, Breach of Duty of Care
Civil Procedure Corporate Law Property Law Professional Negligence Security for Costs Transfer of Registry Consolidation/case Management Protest to Jurisdiction +1 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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M J Daisley

First Plaintiff

SDD Limited

Second Plaintiff

Ark Contractors Limited

First Defendant

P G Keller and K E Keller

Second Defendants

Thomson Wilson Law

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Applications for Security for Costs, Transfer of Registry and Case Management/consolidation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered against the plaintiffs
  2. 2 Whether the proceeding should be transferred to the Whangarei Registry under HCR 5.1
  3. 3 Whether the proceeding should be case managed/consolidated with CIV 2016-488-041 and heard sequentially

Ratio Decidendi

Security for costs was ordered because the plaintiff's limited and unsubstantiated financial evidence, outstanding judgment against him, lack of demonstrable income and uncertain value of claimed Ark shareholding showed he was likely unable to pay costs; accordingly the court ordered specific security payments and stayed the proceedings until paid; the proceeding was transferred to the Whangarei Registry under HCR 5.1 because Ark was controlled and managed from Whangarei and most parties and witnesses are located there; the proceeding is to be case managed with CIV 2016-488-041 and heard sequentially.

Court Disposition

Security for costs ordered; proceedings stayed until security paid; proceeding transferred to Whangarei Registry; to be case managed with CIV 2016-488-041 and heard sequentially; costs reserved.

Orders

  • Mr Daisley to pay security of $20,000 on account of the claims against the first and second defendants
  • Mr Daisley to pay security of $20,000 in respect of the claim against Thomson Wilson