29 May 2023
DUNSTAN v BANK OF NEW ZEALAND [2023] NZHC 1286
- Citation
- [2023] NZHC 1286
- Court
- High Court
The plaintiff's claim was without merit because it relied on the view that a promissory note effected payment absent the recipient's acceptance; that argument had been previously rejected and the Bills of Exchange Act does not require acceptance by a recipient, therefore BNZ was entitled to costs. An uplift of 50% was justified under r14.6(3) because the plaintiff persisted in an argument known to lack merit, and the claimed disbursements were reasonable and approved.