THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR V TAITO & ORS CA CA225/04

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR V TAITO & ORS CA CA225/04

The successful appellant is entitled to costs because the appeal was allowed and there was no evidence to rebut the presumption that costs follow the event; inability to pay without evidence does not defeat entitlement to costs.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
openlaw-a192f723_84e5_4837_9133_9bcd5bda2c14.pdf
Parties
Appellant: The Chief Executive of the Department of Labour; Respondent: Tui Taito; Respondent: Itanei Taito; Respondent: Pilua Taito; Respondent: Ana Taito; Respondent: Faafetai Taito; Respondent: Iuliano Taito
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
19 September 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Costs Application Following Allowance of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal previously allowed; costs awarded to appellant.
Legal Topics
Costs Follow the Event, Entitlement to Costs, Ability to Pay, Enforcement of Costs
Labour Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Costs Costs Follow the Event Entitlement to Costs Ability to Pay Enforcement of Costs

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Chief Executive of the Department of Labour

Appellant

Tui Taito

Respondent

Itanei Taito

Respondent

Pilua Taito

Respondent

Ana Taito

Respondent

Faafetai Taito

Respondent

Iuliano Taito

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Costs Application Following Allowance of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether costs should follow the event
  2. 2 Whether respondents' inability to pay affects entitlement to costs
  3. 3 Appropriate quantum of costs

Ratio Decidendi

The successful appellant is entitled to costs because the appeal was allowed and there was no evidence to rebut the presumption that costs follow the event; inability to pay without evidence does not defeat entitlement to costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal previously allowed; costs awarded to appellant.

Orders

  • Respondents must pay to the appellant costs in the sum of $6,000 plus usual disbursements.