Black v Giltech Precision Castings (2004) Limited HC Christchurch CIV-2010-412-000105

[2011] NZHC 1408

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

CIV-2010-412-000105

UNDER  the Companies Act 1993

IN THE MATTER OF     an application by shareholders under s 174 of the Companies Act 1993

BETWEEN  PAUL BLACK First Plaintiff

ANDPAUL BLACK GLENDA BLACK Second Plaintiffs

ANDWMC TRUSTEE LIMITED Third Plaintiff

ANDGILTECH PRECISION CASTINGS (2004) LIMITED

First Defendant

ANDP & W CONSOLIDATED LIMITED Second Defendant

Judgment:      17 October 2011

JUDGMENT OF HON JUSTICE FRENCH

as to Costs

[1]      There have been five interlocutory applications in this proceeding.  Four were brought by the plaintiffs, and one by the defendants.

[2]      In my decision of 5 September 2011, I indicated a provisional view that costs should lie where they fall, but invited counsel to make submissions should they wish

to be heard.

BLACK V GILTECH PRECISION CASTINGS (2004) LIMITED HC CHCH CIV-2010-412-000105 17 October

2011

[3]     Since then, both parties have filed submissions accusing the other of unreasonable behaviour and seeking increased costs.

[4]      In my assessment, there is fault on both sides.   Each has put the other to unnecessary cost.  The plaintiff has been guilty of significant delays and taken points that should not have been taken.   On the other hand, the defendants failed to act promptly in relation to the representation issue and must also take responsibility for the fact that aspects of their request for particulars went well beyond the proper scope of particulars.

[5]      Not only is there fault on both sides, but I also consider that the honours were evenly divided.  Contrary to a submission made by Mr Farrow, I consider that the outcome of the representation order can fairly be characterised as the plaintiffs being successful.  As reflected in my judgment, the focus of the hearing was very much on the issue of Anderson Lloyd assisting with briefs of evidence.

[6]      I am therefore not persuaded to depart from my provisional view. [7] Costs on all five applications are to lie where they fall.

Solicitors:

R Kelly, Dunedin

Webb Farry, Dunedin