CURRIE v GORDON [2015] NZHC 2917

CURRIE v GORDON [2015] NZHC 2917

Defendants' applications for increased costs and costs for out‑of‑town counsel and the first defendant's expert airfare are declined because the plaintiffs' expert deficiencies were not so obvious pre‑trial as to render settlement refusal unreasonable and necessity for out‑of‑town counsel or overseas expert travel was not established; reasonable expert preparation costs are allowed but travel/attendance beyond testifying is disallowed.

Citation
[2015] NZHC 2917
Parties
Plaintiffs: DAVID ALLAN CURRIE AND LYNETTE FRANCES CURRIE AS TRUSTEES RESPECTIVELY OF THE D A CURRIE FAMILY TRUST AND THE L F CURRIE FAMILY TRUST; First Defendant: SCOTT HAMISH GORDON; Second Defendant: SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL; Third Parties: DAVID ALLAN CURRIE AND LYNETTE FRANCES CURRIE
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
20 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Building Defect Dispute / Costs Ruling (judgment on Costs)
Outcome
Defendants' applications for increased costs and for recovery of out‑of‑town counsel costs denied; first defendant's expert airfare disallowed; second defendant may recover reasonable travel, accommodation and expenses linked to the actual giving of his evidence; expert preparation of 18 hours accepted; discovery...
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Costs Awards, Settlement Offers, Discovery, Out‑of‑town Counsel, Expert Witnesses Travel
Civil Procedure Building Law Evidence Costs Law Expert Evidence Costs Awards Settlement Offers Discovery +2 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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DAVID ALLAN CURRIE AND LYNETTE FRANCES CURRIE AS TRUSTEES RESPECTIVELY OF THE D A CURRIE FAMILY TRUST AND THE L F CURRIE FAMILY TRUST

Plaintiffs

SCOTT HAMISH GORDON

First Defendant

SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Second Defendant

DAVID ALLAN CURRIE AND LYNETTE FRANCES CURRIE

Third Parties

Procedural Posture

Civil Building Defect Dispute / Costs Ruling (judgment on Costs)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants are entitled to increased costs for plaintiffs' conduct and expert failings
  2. 2 Whether costs of out‑of‑town counsel are recoverable
  3. 3 Whether airfare for an expert who relocated overseas is recoverable

Ratio Decidendi

Defendants' applications for increased costs and costs for out‑of‑town counsel and the first defendant's expert airfare are declined because the plaintiffs' expert deficiencies were not so obvious pre‑trial as to render settlement refusal unreasonable and necessity for out‑of‑town counsel or overseas expert travel was not established; reasonable expert preparation costs are allowed but travel/attendance beyond testifying is disallowed.

Court Disposition

Defendants' applications for increased costs and for recovery of out‑of‑town counsel costs denied; first defendant's expert airfare disallowed; second defendant may recover reasonable travel, accommodation and expenses linked to the actual giving of his evidence; expert preparation of 18 hours accepted; discovery...

Orders

  • No order for increased costs to defendants
  • No recovery of costs for out‑of‑town counsel