AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL v MAWHINNEY [2014] NZHC 3316
Costs were awarded to the plaintiff, Auckland City Council, on a category 2B scale with disbursements, because costs should follow the event and the defendant did not respond; the total awarded was $6,130.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] NZHC 3316
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Auckland City Council; Defendant: Peter William Mawhinney
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 18 December 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Review / Costs Judgment
- Outcome
- Costs awarded to Auckland City Council on a category 2B basis
- Legal Topics
- Costs Assessment, Scale Costs (category 2 B), Disbursements, Failure to Respond
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Auckland City Council
Plaintiff
Peter William Mawhinney
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Application for Review / Costs Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether costs should follow the event
- 2 Whether scale costs on a category 2B basis are appropriate
- 3 Whether costs and disbursements totalling $6,130 should be awarded
Ratio Decidendi
Costs were awarded to the plaintiff, Auckland City Council, on a category 2B scale with disbursements, because costs should follow the event and the defendant did not respond; the total awarded was $6,130.
Court Disposition
Costs awarded to Auckland City Council on a category 2B basis
Orders
- Costs awarded on a category 2B basis
- Costs and disbursements totalling $6,130 to be paid by the defendant
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL v MAWHINNEY [2014] NZHC 3316 [18 December 2014]IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALANDAUCKLAND REGISTRYCIV-2013-404-4227[2014] NZHC 3316BETWEEN AUCKLAND CITY COUNCILPlaintiffAND PETER WILLIAM MAWHINNEYDefendantHearing: On the papersJudgment: 18 December 2014JUDGMENT AS TO COSTS OF THOMAS JThis judgment was delivered by me on 18 December 2014 at 4.00 pmpursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.Registrar/Deputy RegistrarDate:.[1] By my decision dated 7 October 2014, I dismissed Mr Mawhinney'sapplication for review of decisions of Doogue AJ.[2] Paragraph 37 of my decision says:There would seem no reason why costs should not follow the event on a 2B basis. If an agreement cannot be reached however, the Council is to file and serve a memorandum within 21 days of this decision. Any response from Mr Mawhinney is to be filed and served 14 days thereafter.[3] I have received a memorandum of counsel for the Auckland Council. The Council seeks scale costs and disbursements on a category 2B basis, totalling $6,130. The Council has sought those costs from Mr Mawhinney but he has failed to respondto the Council's communications. Mr Mawhinney has not filed a memorandum inresponse to that of the Auckland Council.[4] I am satisfied that costs on a 2B basis are appropriate and they are awarded accordingly._______________________Thomas J