BPE TRUSTEES (NO. 1) LIMITED v BASSETT-BURR [2021] NZHC 1533

BPE TRUSTEES (NO. 1) LIMITED v BASSETT-BURR [2021] NZHC 1533

Because the judgment creditors were entitled to proceed until the Court of Appeal overturned the underlying judgment and both sides acted within their rights, fairness requires that costs of this proceeding lie where they fell; therefore the applicant's costs application is dismissed.

Citation
[2021] NZHC 1533
Parties
First Judgment Creditor: BPE Trustees (No. 1) Limited; Second Judgment Creditor: Quentin Haines Properties Limited; Judgment Debtor: Roy William Bassett-Burr
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
25 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Costs Application Following Discontinuance of Proceeding After Appeal / Application for Costs on Discontinuance
Outcome
Application for costs dismissed; costs to lie where they have fallen.
Legal Topics
Statutory Demand, Discontinuance, Costs on Discontinuance, Effect of Appeal on Judgment
Civil Procedure Bankruptcy Law Costs Appeal Statutory Demand Discontinuance Costs on Discontinuance Effect of Appeal on Judgment

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BPE Trustees (No. 1) Limited

First Judgment Creditor

Quentin Haines Properties Limited

Second Judgment Creditor

Roy William Bassett-Burr

Judgment Debtor

Procedural Posture

Costs Application Following Discontinuance of Proceeding After Appeal / Application for Costs on Discontinuance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the discontinuing party is liable for costs under High Court Rules r 15.3
  2. 2 Whether the judgment creditors were entitled to commence and maintain proceedings given the status of the underlying judgment and pending appeal
  3. 3 What is the fair allocation of costs where both parties acted reasonably and within their rights

Ratio Decidendi

Because the judgment creditors were entitled to proceed until the Court of Appeal overturned the underlying judgment and both sides acted within their rights, fairness requires that costs of this proceeding lie where they fell; therefore the applicant's costs application is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for costs dismissed; costs to lie where they have fallen.

Orders

  • Application for costs dismissed.
  • Costs of this proceeding to lie where they have fallen.