18 Aug 2021
The plaintiff failed to respond to repeated directions and the defendants' costs memorandum, had been given ample opportunity to respond, and therefore costs were appropriately awarded to the defendants on a 2B basis with a limited discount for duplicative claimed items (Step 28).
16 Jun 2021
The Court found the initial application was not unreasonable given the circumstances, the applicants achieved an outcome largely consistent with their amended position, but on balance the benefits achieved by the sale and the parties' conduct meant costs should lie where they fall; accordingly the plaintiffs' costs application was declined.
30 Apr 2009
The Court granted a limited variation of the consent order: Southern must, in addition to the agreed capped fee, meet the whole of Mr Judd's accounts already rendered and half of Ms Mills' (and, if applicable, half of Mr Powrie's) accounts for 13 November 2007–29 February 2008, because those additional costs were causally attributable to the defendants' manner of settling the Wellington proceedings which hindered plaintiffs' access to material; otherwise the consent order remains in force because plaintiffs failed to show a broader change in circumstances and much of the trial overrun resulte…