16 Sept 2022
Leave was granted because the proceeding was trial-ready and would avoid undue delay and relitigation, the non-debt elements of the claim involved complexity more appropriately dealt with by the High Court, there was minimal demonstrated prejudice to other creditors given the small disclosed creditor claims, and there was no evidence the proceeding would be fruitless.
30 Jul 2020
The court declined to order non-party costs against Mr Tahiri because the conduct relied on accrued pre-commencement (generally irrelevant to costs), Mr Tahiri did not actively oppose the proceeding beyond an appearance at first call and ultimately supported liquidation, and the circumstances were not sufficiently exceptional or unfair to justify a personal costs order against a non-party.
26 Jan 2011
The court granted the liquidator leave to discontinue the application to set-aside the statutory demand because the company entered voluntary liquidation and the liquidator confirmed discontinuance; the scheduled hearing was vacated and appearances were excused; costs were reserved with a procedure for filing memoranda and the judge to decide costs absent a request for oral argument.
12 Apr 2010
The Court concluded that the shareholders' voluntary resolution dated 7 April 2010 was passed within the 10 working day period prescribed by s241AA(2) and was therefore effective; the earlier court order of 11.13 am placing the defendant into liquidation and appointing liquidators was made in error and was recalled and rescinded, the voluntary liquidation stands and the plaintiff's application is dismissed, with costs awarded to the plaintiff.
2 Dec 2008
Joinder under r 97 was refused because the director's interest was indirect and consequential, her presence was unnecessary for effective adjudication, and discretionary factors (late application, failure to fund liquidators) justified refusal.
19 Oct 2007
Leave to withdraw the application was granted and costs were awarded to the respondent because the applicant's voluntary liquidation effectively discontinued the proceeding; under High Court Rules r476C the presumption is that costs follow the event, and the applicant's asserted grounds were not sufficient to displace that presumption given an undisputed core debt and justified use of Section 157 notices.
28 Sept 2007
Exceptional circumstances existed to order non-party costs because Stephenson caused the proceedings by filing the only supporting affidavit which was misleading, failed to respond to allegations and submissions, placed the company into voluntary liquidation at the 11th hour, and thereby acted in bad faith and with impropriety; accordingly indemnity costs of $2,867.25 were awarded against him.
28 Sept 2007
Exceptional circumstances existed: Stephenson's affidavit caused the application, was contradicted by contemporaneous emails, he failed to respond to allegations and instead placed the company into voluntary liquidation, and he acted in bad faith and likely funded the application; accordingly it was just to order non-party indemnity costs of $2,867.25 against Stephenson.
3 Sept 2007
The application to set aside the statutory demand was dismissed because the applicant did not proceed and had entered voluntary liquidation; indemnity costs of $2,867.25 were awarded against the applicant under r 48C(4) because the applicant acted frivolously and vexatiously by continuing the proceeding despite placing itself into liquidation, causing wasted costs; the request for costs against non‑party Mr Stephenson was reserved for decision after submissions.
31 Aug 2007
The application to set aside the statutory demand was dismissed because the applicant did not proceed and had placed the company into voluntary liquidation; indemnity costs in the sum claimed were awarded against the applicant under r 48C(4) because the conduct was frivolous and vexatious and wasted the respondent's costs; the claim for costs against non‑party Mr Stephenson was reserved for further submissions.