HOEBERECHTS v THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE [2023] NZHC 597
Rule 1.18 was not engaged in the circumstances; the applicant's argument that others should bear the costs was rejected; the Commissioner was entitled to costs and disbursements totalling $5,636.13 to be paid by the applicant.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] NZHC 597
- Parties
- Applicant: Veronica Anne Hoeberechts; Respondent: The Commissioner of Inland Revenue
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 23 March 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal / Costs Decision Following Refusal of Leave
- Outcome
- Applicant ordered to pay costs and disbursements totalling $5,636.13 to the Commissioner of Inland Revenue.
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Costs Orders, High Court Rules R 1.18, Disbursements
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Veronica Anne Hoeberechts
Applicant
The Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal / Costs Decision Following Refusal of Leave
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether High Court Rule 1.18 applied to the filing of the original notice of appeal
- 2 Whether the applicant should personally bear costs or costs should be borne by counsel/the Commissioner/the Court
- 3 Appropriate quantum of costs and disbursements following refusal of leave
Ratio Decidendi
Rule 1.18 was not engaged in the circumstances; the applicant's argument that others should bear the costs was rejected; the Commissioner was entitled to costs and disbursements totalling $5,636.13 to be paid by the applicant.
Court Disposition
Applicant ordered to pay costs and disbursements totalling $5,636.13 to the Commissioner of Inland Revenue.
Orders
- Ms Hoeberechts to pay costs and disbursements totalling $5,636.13 to the Commissioner of Inland Revenue.
- Costs assessed on a 2B basis with reasonable disbursements (as reflected in the total).
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
HOEBERECHTS v THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE [2023] NZHC 597 [23 March 2023]IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALANDHAMILTON REGISTRYI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROAKIRIKIRIROA ROHECIV 2021-419-288[2023] NZHC 597UNDER The Income Tax Act 2007, the TaxAdministration Act 1994 and s 56(3) of theSenior Courts Act 2016IN THE MATTER OF An application for leave to appeal to theCourt of AppealBETWEEN VERONICA ANNE HOEBERECHTSApplicantAND THE COMMISSIONER OF INLANDREVENUERespondentOn the papersCounsel: The applicant in personK Naik-Leong for the respondentJudgment: 23 March 2023JUDGMENT OF CAMPBELL J[Costs]This judgment was delivered by me on 23 March 2023 at 11.00 am pursuant to Rule 11.5of the High Court RulesRegistrar/Deputy Registrar[1] In a judgment dated 5 January 2023,1 I declined Ms Hoeberechts's applicationfor leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal my earlier judgment in which I declined herapplication for leave to appeal out of time to this Court.2 I also ordered that theCommissioner was entitled to costs on the application.[2] The Commissioner filed a memorandum seeking costs on a 2B basis togetherwith reasonable disbursements. The total amount sought is $5,636.13.[3] Ms Hoeberechts filed a memorandum in response. She submits that the costsawarded to the Commissioner (in both of my two judgments) should not be borneby her but should instead be borne by counsel for the Commissioner, by theCommissioner and/or by the Hamilton High Court. Ms Hoeberechts submits thosepersons should bear the costs because they should have realised that r 1.18 of the HighCourt Rules 2016 was engaged at the time she filed her original notice of appeal in theHigh Court.[4] In my judgment dated 5 January 2023, I held that r 1.18 was not engaged.3I therefore reject Ms Hoeberechts' submission.[5] I order that Ms Hoeberechts is to pay costs and disbursements totalling$5,636.13 to the Commissioner.______________________Campbell J1 Hoeberechts v Commissioner of Inland Revenue [2023] NZHC 1.2 Hoeberechts v Commissioner of Inland Revenue [2022] NZHC 2200.3 Hoeberechts v Commissioner of Inland Revenue [2023] NZHC 1 at [20].