WALKER & Ors V BALE & ORS HC AK CIV-2008-044-2721

WALKER & Ors V BALE & ORS HC AK CIV-2008-044-2721

The plaintiffs are entitled to party and party costs for the strike-out application calculated under Rule 2B; the defendants' non-compliant costs memorandum was not read; the plaintiffs' partial use of counsel and litigant-in-person status do not preclude a costs award; a one day discount is appropriate for...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
openlaw-6e967e39_3cc8_4839_911a_6f50920bd741.pdf
Parties
Plaintiffs: Isobel Anne Walker; Alison Claire Macmillan; Diane Wardill as trustees of the Sciwi Family Trust; First Defendants: Ronald Frank Bale and Joannorma Bale; Second Defendants: Ronald Frank Bale and Joannorma Bale as trustees of the Bale Family Trust of Auckland
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
30 August 2012
Procedural Posture
Strike Out Application and Costs / Costs Judgment (reserved; Delivered 30 August 2012)
Outcome
Plaintiffs awarded costs for the strike-out application
Legal Topics
Strike Out, Party and Party Costs, Solicitor Client Costs, Compliance With Court Directions, Judicial Discretion on Costs
Civil Procedure Costs Trusts Strike Out Party and Party Costs Solicitor Client Costs Compliance With Court Directions Judicial Discretion on Costs

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

Parties

Isobel Anne Walker; Alison Claire Macmillan; Diane Wardill as trustees of the Sciwi Family Trust

Plaintiffs

Ronald Frank Bale and Joannorma Bale

First Defendants

Ronald Frank Bale and Joannorma Bale as trustees of the Bale Family Trust of Auckland

Second Defendants

Procedural Posture

Strike Out Application and Costs / Costs Judgment (reserved; Delivered 30 August 2012)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiffs are entitled to costs for the strike-out application under Rule 2B
  2. 2 Whether the defendants' non-compliant costs memorandum should be considered
  3. 3 Whether plaintiffs' partial use of counsel or litigant-in-person status precludes recovery of costs

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs are entitled to party and party costs for the strike-out application calculated under Rule 2B; the defendants' non-compliant costs memorandum was not read; the plaintiffs' partial use of counsel and litigant-in-person status do not preclude a costs award; a one day discount is appropriate for identified pleading deficiencies, producing a net award of $5,273.50.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs awarded costs for the strike-out application

Orders

  • Plaintiffs awarded party and party costs calculated under Rule 2B in the sum of $7,263.50 before discount
  • After allowing a discount equivalent to one day's attendances the costs awarded to plaintiffs are $5,273.50