LIPP V CHANEY HC AK CIV 2011-404-008091

LIPP V CHANEY HC AK CIV 2011-404-008091

Defendants are entitled to costs assessed on a Category 2B basis in accordance with the applicable High Court schedules, with a 25 percent reduction to reflect the plaintiffs' partial success in establishing one jurisdictional error; the new costs schedules apply only to steps after 14 June 2012; scale cost of one...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
openlaw-4edc6d82_a550_469e_9975_75cdf4637969.pdf
Parties
Plaintiff: Thomas Rainer Lipp; Plaintiff: Karen Wendy Lipp; Defendant: Stephen John Chaney; Defendant: Edith Marguerite Chaney
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
3 September 2012
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Arbitral Award and Related Appeal Under the Arbitration Act 1996 / Costs Determination Following Judgment on Application to Set Aside Arbitral Award and Appeal
Outcome
Costs awarded to defendants on Category 2B basis, subject to 25% reduction except costs of the unsuccessful stay application which are not reduced; new costs schedules apply only to steps after 14 June 2012; one day allowed for hearing; parties to agree quantum or file joint memorandum on any residual issues.
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Arbitral Award, Jurisdictional Error, Costs Assessment, High Court Costs Schedules, Equitable Estoppel, Stay Application
Arbitration Civil Procedure Costs Law Setting Aside Arbitral Award Jurisdictional Error Costs Assessment High Court Costs Schedules Equitable Estoppel +1 more

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

Parties

Thomas Rainer Lipp

Plaintiff

Karen Wendy Lipp

Plaintiff

Stephen John Chaney

Defendant

Edith Marguerite Chaney

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Arbitral Award and Related Appeal Under the Arbitration Act 1996 / Costs Determination Following Judgment on Application to Set Aside Arbitral Award and Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitral award should be set aside
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator exceeded his jurisdiction in a direction requiring a new plan
  3. 3 Appropriate costs order and applicable costs scale

Ratio Decidendi

Defendants are entitled to costs assessed on a Category 2B basis in accordance with the applicable High Court schedules, with a 25 percent reduction to reflect the plaintiffs' partial success in establishing one jurisdictional error; the new costs schedules apply only to steps after 14 June 2012; scale cost of one day is allowed for the hearing; costs of the unsuccessful stay application are awarded to the defendants and are not subject to the 25 percent reduction.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to defendants on Category 2B basis, subject to 25% reduction except costs of the unsuccessful stay application which are not reduced; new costs schedules apply only to steps after 14 June 2012; one day allowed for hearing; parties to agree quantum or file joint memorandum on any residual issues.

Orders

  • Defendants awarded costs on a Category 2B basis in accordance with applicable High Court costs schedules
  • All costs awarded to defendants, other than costs of the unsuccessful stay application, are reduced by 25 percent to reflect plaintiffs' partial success