23 Apr 2015
Because WDL succeeded on appeal and no good reason existed to depart from the general rule that a successful interlocutory applicant receives costs, the Court reversed its earlier costs decision and awarded costs to WDL on a 2B basis for single counsel; certification for a second counsel was refused because the application was not sufficiently complex.
17 Apr 2015
Leave to appeal was refused because the Court of Appeal Judge's direction was authorised by r5 of the Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules, the applicant had failed to comply with mandatory filing requirements (r40, r43) and had not remedied the failure when given an opportunity, and there was no matter of public importance nor any miscarriage of justice warranting leave.
29 Mar 2010
The High Court's order requiring modest security for costs was lawful and within discretion; s 67 jurisdiction to grant leave was doubtful but, on the merits, there was no arguable question of law or principle to justify leave to appeal; bankruptcy does not automatically bar security and the unless order operated under s 74 District Courts Act 1947 to dismiss the appeal; interlocutory case management orders are not subject to a general right of appeal under s 66.
2 Dec 2008
The discovery sought is directly relevant to the determination of leave under the Limitation Act (disability and reasonable discoverability); accordingly specific discovery is necessary and the defendants' application for discovery is granted with a timetable for verified lists and production by 27 March 2009.