FOOTE v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2022] NZHC 2060
The court awarded the respondent costs of $5,079.56 (excluding GST), applying r 14.2(1)(f) of the High Court Rules to limit the award to the actual costs incurred despite a higher tariff amount being claimable under the rules.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] NZHC 2060
- Parties
- Appellant: Tony Charles Foote; Respondent: New Zealand Police
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 19 August 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Costs Decision
- Outcome
- Costs awarded to respondent
- Legal Topics
- Arms Act 1983, Rights of Appeal, Costs
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Tony Charles Foote
Appellant
New Zealand Police
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Costs Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant had a right of appeal under the Arms Act 1983
- 2 Whether and in what amount costs should be awarded to the respondent
- 3 Whether an award of costs is limited by actual costs incurred under High Court Rules r 14.2(1)(f)
Ratio Decidendi
The court awarded the respondent costs of $5,079.56 (excluding GST), applying r 14.2(1)(f) of the High Court Rules to limit the award to the actual costs incurred despite a higher tariff amount being claimable under the rules.
Court Disposition
Costs awarded to respondent
Orders
- Tony Charles Foote must pay $5,079.56 (excluding GST) to New Zealand Police as costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
FOOTE v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2022] NZHC 2060 [19 August 2022]IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALANDROTORUA REGISTRYI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROATE ROTORUA-NUI-A-KAHUMATAMOMOE ROHECIV-2022-463-9[2022] NZHC 2060BETWEEN TONY CHARLES FOOTEAppellantAND NEW ZEALAND POLICERespondentHearing: On the papersCounsel: E R Dyche for the AppellantA L McConachy for the RespondentJudgment: 19 August 2022JUDGMENT OF GORDON J[As to costs]This judgment was delivered by meon 19 August 2022 at 11:45 am, pursuant tor 11.5 of the High Court RulesRegistrar/Deputy RegistrarDate:Solicitors/Counsel:E R Dyche, Pawson Law Ltd, Te PukeA L McConachy, Crown Solicitor, Rotorua[1] This is a costs decision following my judgment refusing the appeal on aquestion of law concerning rights of appeal under the Arms Act 1983 by the appellantTony Foote in Foote v New Zealand Police.1[2] The respondent, the New Zealand Police (Police), as the successful partyapplies for costs against Mr Foote.[3] Ms McConachy for the Police calculates costs under the High Court Rules2016 as $6,916.50. However, she notes that the actual costs incurred by the Police(excluding GST) were $5,079.56. Having regard to r 14.2(1)(f) of the High CourtRules which provides that an award of costs should not exceed the costs incurred bythe party claiming costs, the Police seek recovery of the actual costs incurred.[4] Ms Dyche for Mr Foote agrees that costs of $5,079.56 (excluding GST) shouldbe ordered.[5] I accept that the steps set out in the memorandum of counsel for the Policewere steps that were taken and that the amount of $6,916.50 is the amount that couldbe claimed under the High Court Rules.[6] However, given that the actual costs were less than that amount, the actual costsshould be the amount awarded.[7] I make an order that Mr Foote pay $5,079.56 (excluding GST) as costs to thePolice._____________________________Gordon J1 Foote v New Zealand Police [2022] NZHC 1670.