MAO v INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL BANK OF CHINA (NEW ZEALAND) LTD [2023] NZHC 1101
Costs of $17,447 were awarded to the defendant on a 2B basis and disbursements of $3,226.08 were allowed because the proceeding was of average complexity, the steps taken by the defendant were reasonably required, the disbursements were substantiated by invoice, and the plaintiffs did not oppose the claim;...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] NZHC 1101
- Parties
- First Plaintiff: Liansen Mao; Second Plaintiff: Qiufen Lu; Defendant: Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (New Zealand) Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 10 May 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Post Judgment Costs Application
- Outcome
- Costs of $17,447 and disbursements of $3,226.08 awarded to Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (New Zealand) Limited against Liansen Mao and Qiufen Lu; liability joint and several.
- Legal Topics
- Costs Assessment, 2 B Scale, Disbursements, Strike Out Application, Leave to Continue Proceeding
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Liansen Mao
First Plaintiff
Qiufen Lu
Second Plaintiff
Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (New Zealand) Limited
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Judgment Costs Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendant should be awarded costs on a 2B basis
- 2 Whether claimed disbursements were reasonable and recoverable
- 3 Whether plaintiffs are jointly and severally liable for the costs and disbursements
Ratio Decidendi
Costs of $17,447 were awarded to the defendant on a 2B basis and disbursements of $3,226.08 were allowed because the proceeding was of average complexity, the steps taken by the defendant were reasonably required, the disbursements were substantiated by invoice, and the plaintiffs did not oppose the claim; plaintiffs held jointly and severally liable.
Court Disposition
Costs of $17,447 and disbursements of $3,226.08 awarded to Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (New Zealand) Limited against Liansen Mao and Qiufen Lu; liability joint and several.
Orders
- Costs of $17,447 awarded to Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (New Zealand) Limited against Liansen Mao and Qiufen Lu on a 2B basis.
- Disbursements of $3,226.08 awarded to Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (New Zealand) Limited against Liansen Mao and Qiufen Lu.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
MAO v INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL BANK OF CHINA (NEW ZEALAND) LTD [2023] NZHC 1101[10 May 2023]IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALANDAUCKLAND REGISTRYI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROATĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHECIV-2022-404-1536[2023] NZHC 1101BETWEEN LIANSEN MAOFirst PlaintiffQIUFEN LUSecond PlaintiffAND INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIALBANK OF CHINA (NEW ZEALAND)LIMITEDDefendantHearing: On the papersJudgment: 10 May 2023JUDGMENT OF WYLIE J[Costs]This judgment was delivered by Justice WylieOn 10 May 2023 at 2.00 pmPursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court RulesRegistrar/Deputy RegistrarDate:Solicitors/counsel:Buddle Findlay, AucklandCopy to:L MaoQ Lu[1] I refer to my judgment dated 30 March 2023.1 I there declined Mr Mao's andMs Lu's application for leave to continue the proceeding. I noted that the proceedingwas at an end and that there was nothing to strike out.[2] The defendant bank now seeks costs on a 2B basis in the sum of $17,447 anddisbursements of $3,226.08.[3] In my judgment, I recorded that the bank as the successful party was entitledto its reasonable costs and disbursements and indicated my preliminary view that costsshould be fixed on a 2B basis.[4] I remain of that view. The proceeding was of average complexity requiringcounsel of average skill and experience in this Court. I have considered the costs claimmade by the bank. Insofar as I can glean, it has taken each of the steps itemised in theschedule attached to its submissions and it has claimed at the appropriate daily rate. Itclaims costs for preparing and filing a strike out application. Those were stepsreasonably required in relation to the proceeding. It is appropriate to allow for them.The disbursements claimed have been incurred; the invoice for the translation ofChinese documents has been provided and there is nothing to suggest that the amountclaimed is unreasonable.[5] Mr Mao and Ms Lu have not taken the opportunity to respond with amemorandum in opposition to the bank's claim for costs and disbursements.[6] On the materials before me, I am satisfied that an order for costs anddisbursements in favour of the bank is appropriate. I award costs of $17,447 to thebank and against Mr Mao and Ms Lu, together with disbursements of $3,226.08. Asbetween Mr Mao and Ms Lu, liability is joint and several.____________________________Wylie J1 Mao v Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (New Zealand) Ltd [2023] NZHC 673.