New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Costs on a 2b basis

Legal area

Court

19 Oct 2023

WELSFORD v WOODFORD [2023] NZHC 2937

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2937
Court

High Court

Because the defendant did not appear and liability under the settlement agreement was clear, the Court entered judgment for the plaintiff for the unpaid instalments (principal $33,333.28), awarded interest under s 9 of the Interest on Money Claims Act 2016 calculated to $938.26 to 19 October 2023, and awarded costs of $11,591.50 and disbursements of $3,702.50; further unaccrued instalments were adjourned to 21 March 2024 with leave to the plaintiff to bring the matter on earlier if required.
1 Dec 2022

BANORA v AUCKLAND COUNCIL [2022] NZHC 3200

Citation

[2022] NZHC 3200
Court

High Court

Because the applicants failed to challenge the respondent's cost memorandum after being given the opportunity and the court, having examined the amounts, was satisfied they were appropriately claimed, judgment was entered for the respondent for the claimed costs and disbursements.
7 Mar 2018

ORMOND v PONGAROA LAND CO LIMITED [2018] NZHC 334

Citation

[2018] NZHC 334
Court

High Court

Because the applicant's application to prevent the caveat from lapsing was declined and no persuasive argument was advanced to depart from the court's preliminary view, the respondent was entitled to costs on a 2B basis and to recover $9,589.00 plus disbursements as fixed by the Registrar.
18 Oct 2017

BRKIC v WHITE [2017] NZHC 2542

Citation

[2017] NZHC 2542
Court

High Court

Where a party's default caused the adjournment, the defaulting party must pay wasted costs; accordingly the defendants were ordered to pay wasted costs of $8,028 assessed on a 2B basis because their failure to consider joining a third party earlier led to the adjournment.
8 Mar 2016

L-A T S v C B S [2016] NZHC 376

Citation

[2016] NZHC 376
Court

High Court

Because the defendant did not contest the plaintiff's claim for costs or provide cogent reasons to depart from the norm, the court awarded costs to the successful plaintiff on a 2B basis in accordance with the schedule provided by counsel.
21 Dec 2006

B J SCARLETT LIMITED V BROOKSIDE CONTRACTING LIMITED HC AK CIV 2006-404-4572

Citation

openlaw-1f4da419_3e3c_446f_85e2_025113f0bf48.pdf
Court

High Court

Because the plaintiff filed the court application for appointment of liquidators before the company purportedly passed a resolution to appoint liquidators, the Court awarded costs to the plaintiff on a 2B basis together with disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar.

New Zealand Case Law

WELSFORD v WOODFORD [2023] NZHC 2937

BANORA v AUCKLAND COUNCIL [2022] NZHC 3200

ORMOND v PONGAROA LAND CO LIMITED [2018] NZHC 334

BRKIC v WHITE [2017] NZHC 2542

L-A T S v C B S [2016] NZHC 376

B J SCARLETT LIMITED V BROOKSIDE CONTRACTING LIMITED HC AK CIV 2006-404-4572