New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Legal aid

Legal area

Court

3 Nov 2023

HITA v HITA [2023] NZHC 3095

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3095
Court

High Court

Emora was treated as the successful party because she succeeded on the Family Protection Act claim, but not on the Will claims; costs assessment applied 2B scale with a 15% reduction for partial success, but award was capped by Emora's actual legal aid costs. Accordingly costs and disbursements of $25,586.53 were awarded to Emora to be paid out of the estate of Edward Hita; no order as to timing of payment was made.
21 Aug 2023

HENDRIK GEZINUS DIJKSTRA AND BARBARA JANE DIJKSTRA v MARTHA TIERNEY [2023] NZCA 379

Citation

[2023] NZCA 379
Court

Court of Appeal

Appellants were not denied natural justice because they had timely notice, failed to comply with timetabling directions and elected not to appear to seek an adjournment or defend the hearing; alternatively, even if there had been a procedural breach, relief would be refused because appellants' asserted defences were not clearly sustainable and the appropriate remedy for the substantive challenge was an appeal or rehearing rather than judicial review; High Court costs award set aside because the judge overlooked appellants' legal aid status and no s45 certificate issued.
18 Apr 2023

KUMAR v ATTRI AND SONS [2023] NZHC 824

Citation

[2023] NZHC 824
Court

High Court

A successful legally aided appellant is entitled to an award of costs equal to their legal aid grant where that sum does not exceed the appropriate scale costs; here the legal aid grant of $10,704.94 was less than the 2B scale amount and must be awarded, subject to the overarching restriction that costs cannot exceed actual costs incurred.
29 Nov 2022

BACH v PRISON DIRECTOR, AUCKLAND SOUTH CORRECTIONS FACILITY – SERCO [2022] NZHC 3138

Citation

[2022] NZHC 3138
Court

High Court

Costs awarded to the First Respondent for the period before legal aid was granted because the applicant was not an aided person for that period, the proceeding did not engage Rule 14.7(e) public interest protection, the applicant acted unreasonably in conduct of litigation, and financial hardship did not preclude a costs award.
28 Jul 2022

RENNIE v BAKER [2022] NZHC 1827

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1827
Court

High Court

Respondent was entitled to scale costs but not at the level claimed; the Court awarded 2B scale costs for specified items totalling 3.2 days, resulting in costs of $7,648; inability to pay alone did not justify departure from the general principle that costs follow the result.
5 Apr 2022

BEAUXDINE PETER DELAMERE v ATTORNEY GENERAL [2022] NZHC 699

Citation

[2022] NZHC 699
Court

High Court

The Crown produced a judge-signed warrant and sentencing record demonstrating lawful detention; the applicant did not rebut that lawful justification and relied on grounds (challenge to conviction, international instruments, police mistreatment, alleged judicial contract breach) that are not appropriate bases for habeas corpus relief; therefore the writ was refused.
1 Sept 2021

GALLO v SULTAN [2021] NZHC 2286

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2286
Court

High Court

The Court ordered the Notice of Claim shall not lapse but made that order conditional on the applicant commencing proceedings to resolve relationship property issues within 42 days if the issues are not resolved by agreement; the Court reserved leave to the respondent to apply to have the Notice lapse if the condition is not complied with and reserved costs pending further memoranda on the respondent's legal aid application.
29 Jul 2021

PUKA v COUNCIL FOR THE ONGOING GOVERNMENT OF TOKELAU [2021] NZCA 349

Citation

[2021] NZCA 349
Court

Court of Appeal

The application for an extension of time was refused because the delay (over 18 months) was substantial, the explanations proffered did not satisfactorily account for prolonged periods of inactivity (including long unexplained intervals after legal aid and counsel availability), the appeal had been contemplated since September 2019, no early notice was given to respondents, the proposed new evidence was largely not fresh and of doubtful admissibility, and the appeal did not raise novel constitutional issues warranting special indulgence; in those circumstances the interests of justice did not…
19 Jul 2021

GREEN v GILLETTE [2021] NZCA 323

Citation

[2021] NZCA 323
Court

Court of Appeal

Registrar's 17 December 2019 email provided a partial and previously unpresented explanation for delay by a lay appellant; the appeal's merits appeared weak but were not so hopeless that extension must be refused; in the interests of justice the Court recalled its earlier judgment and granted an extension to allow the appellant to file the case on appeal and seek allocation, subject to strict compliance with procedural rules (r 39(1), r 40).
15 Mar 2021

WARD v WARD [2021] NZHC 510

Citation

[2021] NZHC 510
Court

High Court

The application for a stay was dismissed: under s 38 the court declined to halt adjudication because the alleged set-off claims lack real merit (legal and evidential deficiencies identified by Gault J), the claims are largely against the estate and may be time-barred or vested in the Official Assignee, and the debtor is unlikely to secure representation or prosecute the claims promptly; consequently the court exercised its discretion to refuse a stay but gave a conditional final opportunity to pay outstanding sums to avoid adjudication.