SPIJKERMAN AND SPIJKERMAN V FEATHERSTONE PARK DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED AND ANOR HC HAM CIV 2008-019-1404

SPIJKERMAN AND SPIJKERMAN V FEATHERSTONE PARK DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED AND ANOR HC HAM CIV 2008-019-1404

Because the plaintiffs succeeded on appeal and the defendants did not contest costs (first defendant abided, second defendant did not seek costs), the Court fixed costs in favour of the plaintiffs on a category 2B basis and awarded the lesser of the two sums claimed in paragraph 23 of the plaintiffs' costs memorandum: $4,416 plus disbursements and $1,680 plus disbursements.

Citation
openlaw-bc3bd9ee_b8ab_49d8_81c7_b66d5f04f4ce.pdf
Parties
Plaintiff: Spijkerman and Spijkerman; First Defendant: Featherstone Park Developments Limited; Second Defendant: McCaw Lewis Chapman
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
27 January 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Costs Application Following Appeal From Summary Judgment Decision / Costs Fixation Following Court of Appeal Reversal
Outcome
Costs awarded to plaintiffs; fixed on category 2B basis.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Appeal, Costs Assessment, Interpleader
Civil Procedure Costs Summary Judgment Appeal Costs Assessment Interpleader

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

Parties

Spijkerman and Spijkerman

Plaintiff

Featherstone Park Developments Limited

First Defendant

McCaw Lewis Chapman

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Costs Application Following Appeal From Summary Judgment Decision / Costs Fixation Following Court of Appeal Reversal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether successful plaintiffs on appeal are entitled to costs
  2. 2 Appropriate category and quantum of costs
  3. 3 Whether defendants sought costs or opposed plaintiffs' costs claim

Ratio Decidendi

Because the plaintiffs succeeded on appeal and the defendants did not contest costs (first defendant abided, second defendant did not seek costs), the Court fixed costs in favour of the plaintiffs on a category 2B basis and awarded the lesser of the two sums claimed in paragraph 23 of the plaintiffs' costs memorandum: $4,416 plus disbursements and $1,680 plus disbursements.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to plaintiffs; fixed on category 2B basis.

Orders

  • Costs to plaintiffs fixed in the lesser of the two amounts claimed: $4,416 plus disbursements
  • Costs to plaintiffs fixed in the lesser of the two amounts claimed: $1,680 plus disbursements