New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Further particulars

Legal area

Court

4 Jul 2023

HELLABY RESOURCE SERVICES LIMITED v BODY CORPORATE 197281 [2023] NZHC 1684

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1684
Court

High Court

The application for 'unless' orders was premature and misconceived because there was no extant order in default nor history of non‑compliance; the Body Corporate had provided particulars 'so far as it was presently able', explained that remaining particulars depended on SRG's discovery, and after SRG served extensive discovery the Body Corporate provided the remaining particulars in the Third ASOC; accordingly SRG was not entitled to costs and the Body Corporate was entitled to costs on a scale 2B with reasonable disbursements.
17 Mar 2023

DARLOW v HALPIN [2023] NZHC 548

Citation

[2023] NZHC 548
Court

High Court

The fourth defendant was entitled to costs as the successful party but those costs were reduced by 25% because his amended statement of defence was inconsistent with his initial pleading (an unjustified about-turn) and because the first to third defendants' demand for an explanatory affidavit was unwarranted; no wasted costs award was made to the first to third defendants due to lack of particularised claim.
20 Oct 2022

MURPHYS PARK DEVELOPMENT LP v GREEN CITY DEVELOPMENTS LP [2022] NZHC 2727 _x000b_

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2727
Court

High Court

Where a defendant alleges a plaintiff failed to use 'all reasonable commercial endeavours' the allegation must be particularised with the positive ways in which the plaintiff is said to have failed so as to give fair notice; a mere negative denial does not alone excuse particulars where the particulars can reasonably be provided from existing knowledge and discovery and are not unduly burdensome.
28 Apr 2021

KEEMATI LIMITED v MR CIVIL LIMITED & ORS [2021] NZHC 917

Citation

[2021] NZHC 917
Court

High Court

Security for costs was required and quantified at $27,404 to be paid in cash by a fixed date; the plaintiff must appoint counsel by a fixed date if it wishes to pursue the claim; applications for further particulars and broader timetabling were deferred because the plaintiff is unrepresented and it would be inappropriate and counter-productive to fix those matters before counsel is appointed; a first case management conference will be listed after counsel is appointed to set further timetabling and a trial date.
13 Apr 2021

ECKHOFF v ORBELL [2021] NZHC 757

Citation

[2021] NZHC 757
Court

High Court

The statement of claim was non-compliant because it failed to plead distinct causes of action and capacities of defendants clearly and contained diffuse and repetitious allegations; the plaintiff was ordered to file an amended statement of claim pleading distinct causes separately and incorporating specified particulars; the application for particular discovery under r 8.19 was dismissed except for agreed financial/disclosure items and subject to conferral on the period and scope of Levels' financial records, after finding no sufficient grounds that further categories of discoverable document…
30 Mar 2021

COMMERCE COMMISSION v HARMONEY LTD [2021] NZHC 665

Citation

[2021] NZHC 665
Court

High Court

The application for further particulars is dismissed because, on the evidence before the court, the Commission does not possess sufficient information to specify more particularised and quantified costs; however the court records that the Commission's pleading effectively puts all of Harmoney's costs in issue, so Harmoney must prepare its evidence on that basis and the Commission should narrow issues as soon as it is able.
10 Dec 2019

LAD v LAD [2019] NZHC 3239

Citation

[2019] NZHC 3239
Court

High Court

Although the first defendant was the successful party overall, the court exercised its discretion to order immediate payment to the plaintiff for costs incurred because the plaintiff agreed to provide further particulars; security for costs was declined and indemnity from the Trust was not granted at this stage but is open for the trial judge to consider; costs awarded on a 2B basis with a 35% reduction under HCR 14(7)(g).
18 Jul 2019

THINKING ERGONOMIX PTY LTD v INTEG INTERNATIONAL LTD [2019] NZHC 1687

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1687
Court

High Court

Defendant failed to establish the requisite preponderant reasons to justify a separate preliminary claim-construction hearing under r10.15 given the practical demarcation uncertainties, modest quantum and significant risk of duplication and appeals; confidentiality claims over the specified documents are justified as they disclose commercially sensitive, non-public technical design information and removal would risk significant prejudice to defendant, but defendant must allow access to independent external experts under undertakings; plaintiff must provide the particulars it committed to and…
1 Apr 2019

HOEBERECHTS (nee SPROTT) v SPROTT [2019] NZHC 651

Citation

[2019] NZHC 651
Court

High Court

Defendant entitled to costs of the interlocutory particulars application; item 36 claim is allowable but reduced to reflect partial success; defendant awarded 80% of claimed costs plus filing fee; plaintiff's request to stay or postpone payment refused due to lack of evidence and no basis to depart from rule that interlocutory costs are payable when judged.
13 Sept 2018

STAPLES v CLAIMS RESOLUTION SERVICE LTD [2018] NZHC 2406

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2406
Court

High Court

Award costs to plaintiffs for one interlocutory application only; declined to award multiple application costs; allowed an uplift for preparation of submissions due to complexity equivalent to three days (Band C for submissions) but retained Band B for bundle preparation (0.6 day); awarded plaintiffs six days Category 2 costs totalling $13,380 plus disbursements $1,109.44; no costs awarded for the costs application between the parties.