19 Apr 2010
HALL V TE HEUHEU AND ORS HC ROT CIV-2008-463-449
- Citation
- openlaw-8bdfd29d_7e91_4e23_84f2_72c4fe8313be.pdf
- Court
- High Court
The application for costs was dismissed because the memorandum was filed long after the deadline and the applicants failed to lay a sufficient foundation to justify an extension of time under r1.19(1); given the need for predictable and expeditious resolution of costs (r14.2(g)) the Court would not grant indulgence based on a bald assertion of oversight.