New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Costs on withdrawal

Legal area

Court

18 Oct 2012

SCAIFE V QUEENSTOWN LAKES DISTRICT COUNCIL HC INV CIV-2011-425-000583

Citation

openlaw-c989d330_4326_4cff_a830_e4946747be03.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court inferred a causal connection between the filing of the judicial review and the lodging of a subsequent notified resource consent application; the notified application achieved the applicants' underlying objective so the applicants were to be regarded as successful under r 14.2(a) and were entitled to 2B costs for the specified preparatory steps.
11 Feb 2009

MICHAEL JOHN SCANDLE V FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL AND ANOR HC AK CIV 2008-488-203

Citation

openlaw-86b13a17_c624_466c_8eeb_eb00bf4e638d.pdf
Court

High Court

Because the defendant withdrew the summary judgment application after full consideration of the plaintiff's evidence and the plaintiff had not complied with High Court Rules timing, the circumstances were not exceptional and the normal NZI Bank principle applies; therefore costs of the application are reserved pending the substantive hearing.
16 Jul 2008

PIONEER INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED V AD ANDERSON AND R ELVIDGE HC NAP CIV 2007-441-882

Citation

openlaw-80ae5e98_058d_48e7_ba70_02b15d68273a.pdf
Court

High Court

The court held that Mr Elvidge's 7 December 2007 affidavit disclosed an arguable defence and clear disputes of fact; therefore the plaintiff should have withdrawn its summary judgment application from that date. Costs were awarded to Mr Elvidge on the withdrawn application from 7 December 2007 on the usual Category 2B basis, with disbursements to be approved by the Registrar.

New Zealand Case Law

SCAIFE V QUEENSTOWN LAKES DISTRICT COUNCIL HC INV CIV-2011-425-000583

MICHAEL JOHN SCANDLE V FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL AND ANOR HC AK CIV 2008-488-203

PIONEER INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED V AD ANDERSON AND R ELVIDGE HC NAP CIV 2007-441-882