CABLETALK LTDV TECHNOLOGY JUNCTION LTD AND ORS HC AK CIV 2005-404-000789

CABLETALK LTDV TECHNOLOGY JUNCTION LTD AND ORS HC AK CIV 2005-404-000789

Given the exchange of communications, the subsequent agreement to pay the judgment sum into the respondents' solicitors' trust account pending appeal, and the shared responsibility for failure to clarify the basis for payment, the Court concluded neither party should be awarded costs of the applications; accordingly the respondents' application for costs was dismissed and costs were ordered to lie where they fall.

Citation
openlaw-896051f7_aa3b_4f0e_a2cf_b0c937c68bf2.pdf
Parties
Plaintiff (civ2005 404 789); Second Defendant (civ2005 404 1475): Cabletalk Limited; First Defendant (civ2005 404 789); Second Plaintiff (civ2005 404 1475): Technology Junction Limited; Second Defendant (civ2005 404 789); Third Plaintiff (civ2005 404 1475): Michael Currie; Third Defendant (civ2005 404 789): Demetrios Baroutsos; First Plaintiff (civ2005 404 1475): Intelligence Office Networks Limited; First Defendant (civ2005 404 1475): Cabletalk Group Limited; Third Defendant (civ2005 404 1475): Peter Gregory Wilson
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
7 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Post Judgment Enforcement and Interlocutory Applications (stay of Execution; Statutory Demand) / Applications to Stay Execution and to Set Aside Statutory Demand; Costs Hearing on Those Applications
Outcome
Respondents' application for costs dismissed; costs to lie where they fall.
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Statutory Demand, Payment Into Solicitor's Trust Account, Costs Orders
Civil Procedure Enforcement of Judgments Company Law Costs Stay of Execution Statutory Demand Payment Into Solicitor's Trust Account Costs Orders

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cabletalk Limited

Plaintiff (civ2005 404 789); Second Defendant (civ2005 404 1475)

Technology Junction Limited

First Defendant (civ2005 404 789); Second Plaintiff (civ2005 404 1475)

Michael Currie

Second Defendant (civ2005 404 789); Third Plaintiff (civ2005 404 1475)

Demetrios Baroutsos

Third Defendant (civ2005 404 789)

Intelligence Office Networks Limited

First Plaintiff (civ2005 404 1475)

Cabletalk Group Limited

First Defendant (civ2005 404 1475)

Peter Gregory Wilson

Third Defendant (civ2005 404 1475)

Procedural Posture

Post Judgment Enforcement and Interlocutory Applications (stay of Execution; Statutory Demand) / Applications to Stay Execution and to Set Aside Statutory Demand; Costs Hearing on Those Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judgment sum should be held in respondents' solicitors' trust account pending appeal and cross-appeal
  2. 2 Whether the statutory demand should be set aside
  3. 3 Whether either party was entitled to costs of the applications and whether indemnity costs and expert witness costs should be awarded

Ratio Decidendi

Given the exchange of communications, the subsequent agreement to pay the judgment sum into the respondents' solicitors' trust account pending appeal, and the shared responsibility for failure to clarify the basis for payment, the Court concluded neither party should be awarded costs of the applications; accordingly the respondents' application for costs was dismissed and costs were ordered to lie where they fall.

Court Disposition

Respondents' application for costs dismissed; costs to lie where they fall.

Orders

  • Judgment sum to be paid to respondents' solicitors and held in their trust account undisbursed pending determination of the appeal and cross-appeal
  • Application to set aside the statutory demand dismissed upon payment; statutory demand set aside by agreement