BROWN & ORS V BURNETT & ORS HC ROT CIV 2012-463-000025

BROWN & ORS V BURNETT & ORS HC ROT CIV 2012-463-000025

Defendants entitled to scale costs for commencement of defence despite no filed defence because investigative and preparatory work is recoverable; no blanket discount for joint memorandum or joint appearance at case management conference because issues differed between defendants, but a 50% reduction to the hearing attendance item was appropriate because hearing time was split; net award to second and third defendants $6,909.

Citation
openlaw-620ed702_1c7d_427c_b4d4_3d032575a55b.pdf
Parties
Plaintiffs: Paul Murray Brown; Kellymarie Brown; Michael Joseph Adamson, as trustees of the Brown Family Trust; First Defendant: Karen Anne Burnett; Second Defendant: Bruce Edward Hodgkinson; Third Defendant: Bruce Hodgkinson Limited
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
25 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil (building Defects/negligence/misrepresentation) / Costs Application Following Discontinuance of Claims Against Second and Third Defendants
Outcome
Costs awarded to second and third defendants against plaintiffs in the sum of $6,909
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Costs Assessment, Negligent Misstatement, Misleading and Deceptive Conduct, Discontinuance
Civil Procedure Contract Tort Construction Law Security for Costs Costs Assessment Negligent Misstatement Misleading and Deceptive Conduct +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Murray Brown; Kellymarie Brown; Michael Joseph Adamson, as trustees of the Brown Family Trust

Plaintiffs

Karen Anne Burnett

First Defendant

Bruce Edward Hodgkinson

Second Defendant

Bruce Hodgkinson Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (building Defects/negligence/misrepresentation) / Costs Application Following Discontinuance of Claims Against Second and Third Defendants

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants are entitled to scale costs for commencement of a defence where no statement of defence was filed
  2. 2 Whether costs for steps prepared/attended jointly for multiple defendants should be apportioned
  3. 3 Whether hearing attendance costs should be reduced because counsel represented multiple parties

Ratio Decidendi

Defendants entitled to scale costs for commencement of defence despite no filed defence because investigative and preparatory work is recoverable; no blanket discount for joint memorandum or joint appearance at case management conference because issues differed between defendants, but a 50% reduction to the hearing attendance item was appropriate because hearing time was split; net award to second and third defendants $6,909.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to second and third defendants against plaintiffs in the sum of $6,909

Orders

  • Second and third defendants awarded costs against plaintiffs in the sum of $6,909
  • No separate costs awarded for preparation of memoranda