29 Jun 2023
Because the appellant succeeded on appeal and the respondent consented to the costs sought, the Court ordered costs to the appellant on a standard appeal band A basis with usual disbursements.
13 Sept 2017
The Court accepted the High Court's findings that Malley & Co acted competently within the retainer, the appellant authorised and understood the consent memorandum which was binding, the firm's conduct did not cause the loss of the property (loss was caused by the appellant's failure to service the mortgage), the unpaid fees were proven and reasonable (judgment sum $54,594.81), and the appellant's counterclaims lacked evidential foundation; accordingly the appeal is dismissed.
21 Feb 2017
The applicant was entitled to a writ of habeas corpus requiring the respondent to deliver the two children to her and the Court, exercising powers under the Care of Children Act 2004 (or alternatively parens patriae), properly made consent orders implementing a detailed memorandum of arrangements for the children’s immediate welfare; costs were reserved with specified filing timelines.
23 Jul 2014
The defendant was the successful party on the discrete interlocutory application for security for costs and, because the application was pursued in accordance with the parties' agreed timetable and was a standalone matter, the Court awarded costs for that application (Category 2 Band B and filing disbursement) rather than deferring costs to the substantive proceeding.
24 Aug 2012
Because counsel's incorrect statement was an honest mistake that did not prejudice the appellant and the outcome of the appeal would have been the same, the court exercised its discretion to award costs to the successful respondent on a 2B basis.
10 Jul 2009
Because the Bank effectively failed in its opposition and its opposition appeared tactical and unreasonable, the ordinary rule that costs follow the event applied; the Bank was ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs on a 2B basis with disbursements, calculated as if there had been no hearing, capped at $5,911.00.
1 Jun 2007
Clause 2(b) of the consent memorandum, entered into and recorded in writing by counsel with implied authority, was intended in the commercial context to permit Mr Page to pursue his claims in the District Court or High Court and thereby superseded the arbitration agreement in the original contract; consequently no existing arbitration agreement remained to trigger art 8 and there was no jurisdiction to order a stay.
29 May 2007
The Court approved the consent memorandum, directed the existing trustees to resign and permitted sealing of an order substituting two named partners of Gordon and Reed as trustees (one to supervise accounts), adjourned the proceedings to a date in August with telephone conference call capability, and reserved to parties and new trustees the right to seek further directions on 48 hours notice.
16 Mar 2007
The consent memorandum and consequent strike out order between the plaintiffs and BRANZ affected only those parties; it must be construed as having the same effect as a notice of discontinuance under r 476E and is ineffectual to defeat an extant cross-notice served earlier by another defendant (James Hardie). Therefore James Hardie may pursue its cross-notice and is entitled to costs for this point.
11 Oct 2006
Because the applicant succeeded in obtaining a permanent order sustaining the caveat, the application was properly brought after the respondent sought to register a mortgage, the respondent filed no formal opposition and participated in the consent memorandum, costs follow the event; accordingly the respondent is ordered to pay costs to the applicant calculated on a 2B basis together with disbursements as approved by the Registrar.