New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Counterclaim set‑off

Legal area

Court

17 Feb 2011

AIR NEW ZEALAND LIMITED V AIR NIUGINI LIMITED HC AK CIV 2009-404-3460

Citation

openlaw-08e2123b_9de6_4666_94d9_26169cd9de58.pdf
Court

High Court

Plaintiff entitled to immediate costs for the successful summary judgment application; costs awarded on Category 2 Band B for items 1, 5.1, 5.3 and 5.4 of Schedule 3 using the applicable daily recovery rate, with disbursements fixed by the Registrar; refusal of the settlement offer did not justify an uplift and the existence of a counterclaim did not require deferral of costs in the circumstances.
26 Oct 2007

MARINESCAPE NZ LIMITED V CONNELL WAGNER LIMITED HC AK CIV-2007-404-001959

Citation

openlaw-dc5f536c_ddbe_4a39_ad4a_7af8f2c49b7e.pdf
Court

High Court

The plaintiff failed to establish any substantial dispute as to liability (evidence showed the defendant contracted with and invoiced Marinescape NZ Limited), failed to prove the $35,000 payment was directed to satisfy the Istanbul invoices (contemporaneous emails and circumstances show the payment was for Vladivostok work), and failed to show a quantified non-contingent counterclaim or set-off under s 290(4)(b); accordingly the statutory demand was not set aside.