WARD v WARD and JAMES [2020] NZHC 844

WARD v WARD and JAMES [2020] NZHC 844

Allan and Diane were entitled to ordinary 2B scale costs of $13,145 for their successful summary judgment application; increased costs were not warranted because Russell's procedural failures did not make him liable to an uplift on Allan and Diane's application, and although Russell acted unreasonably in pursuing his own summary judgment (justifying departure from the usual reservation of costs for that application), costs related to Russell's unsuccessful summary judgment are reserved to be dealt with at the substantive hearing; the NZBORA challenge by Russell failed and did not prevent an award of costs against him.

Citation
[2020] NZHC 844
Parties
Plaintiff (civ 2018 419 374); Defendant (civ 2019 419 81): Russell Stuart Ward; First Defendant (civ 2018 419 374); Plaintiff (civ 2019 419 81): Christopher Allan Ward; Second Defendant (civ 2018 419 374); Plaintiff (civ 2019 419 81): Diane Lorraine James
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
30 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Costs Determination Under High Court Rules Arising From Summary Judgment and Interlocutory Applications Under Wills Act 2007 and Trustee Act 1957 / Costs Determination (summary Judgment Stage)
Outcome
Allan and Diane awarded 2B scale costs of $13,145; increased costs (uplift) denied; costs on Russell's unsuccessful summary judgment application reserved to the substantive proceeding; security for costs application deferred; NZBORA challenge rejected.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Increased Costs (uplift), Security for Costs, Lay Litigant Costs, NZBORA Challenge
Civil Procedure Costs Wills and Estates Trusts Summary Judgment Increased Costs (uplift) Security for Costs Lay Litigant Costs +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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Russell Stuart Ward

Plaintiff (civ 2018 419 374); Defendant (civ 2019 419 81)

Christopher Allan Ward

First Defendant (civ 2018 419 374); Plaintiff (civ 2019 419 81)

Diane Lorraine James

Second Defendant (civ 2018 419 374); Plaintiff (civ 2019 419 81)

Procedural Posture

Costs Determination Under High Court Rules Arising From Summary Judgment and Interlocutory Applications Under Wills Act 2007 and Trustee Act 1957 / Costs Determination (summary Judgment Stage)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether successful parties (Allan and Diane) are entitled to recover costs and whether increased costs (uplift) are justified under HCR r14.6(3)
  2. 2 Whether a lay litigant (Russell) is immune from costs orders or whether such an award breaches NZBORA
  3. 3 Whether a plaintiff's unsuccessful summary judgment application warrants departure from the practice of reserving costs

Ratio Decidendi

Allan and Diane were entitled to ordinary 2B scale costs of $13,145 for their successful summary judgment application; increased costs were not warranted because Russell's procedural failures did not make him liable to an uplift on Allan and Diane's application, and although Russell acted unreasonably in pursuing his own summary judgment (justifying departure from the usual reservation of costs for that application), costs related to Russell's unsuccessful summary judgment are reserved to be dealt with at the substantive hearing; the NZBORA challenge by Russell failed and did not prevent an award of costs against him.

Court Disposition

Allan and Diane awarded 2B scale costs of $13,145; increased costs (uplift) denied; costs on Russell's unsuccessful summary judgment application reserved to the substantive proceeding; security for costs application deferred; NZBORA challenge rejected.

Orders

  • Allan and Diane entitled to 2B scale costs of $13,145
  • No increased costs awarded to Allan and Diane