1 Nov 2018
No exceptional circumstances or impropriety were shown; the liquidator acted bona fide, took legal advice, and was exercising statutory duties to recover company assets, so personal liability for costs was inappropriate; costs awarded against the company only.
5 Mar 2013
Because the liquidators went beyond a neutral statutory role and actively sought to set aside the creditors' resolution and opposed appointment of alternative liquidators, they assumed an adversarial role and were personally liable for the opponents' costs; the court awarded the first to sixth respondents NZD 8,955.00, refused any uplift, and declined to make an order under s45(5) in relation to the seventh respondents.
5 Oct 2012
The earlier costs order sealed on 6 September 2012 made the Court functus officio so the sealed award stands; the liquidators could have avoided an adverse costs outcome by deferring rejection or suspending their decision when further material was provided, and therefore they must meet the costs personally; the Court will not direct that costs be added to the proof of debt or be paid from company assets under reg 16 in this case and dismisses the liquidators' application for directions.
21 Dec 2011
The court declined to depart from the entrenched principle that liquidators are generally not liable for costs absent impropriety; withdrawal of earlier proceedings and delay in responding to requests for security did not establish abuse of process or impropriety sufficient to justify costs against the liquidators, and whether to order security for costs is discretionary under r 5.45, therefore the costs application was dismissed and costs were to lie where they fall.