5 Jul 2023
Application for costs on costs dismissed because costs-on-costs awards are discretionary and rare, the initial costs decision was finely balanced with limited success confirmed on appeal, only the first plaintiff had a clear entitlement to costs (and that plaintiff was in liquidation), and there was no basis for the claimed uplift on scale.
7 Jun 2023
The Court awarded 2B scale costs, refused costs-on-costs, allowed reasonable second counsel and expert disbursements, apportioned one case management conference fee between related proceedings, and applied a 30% uplift because the respondent's opposition to the s165 application lacked merit and caused unnecessary additional steps; uplift for refusal to settle was reserved as premature and may be raised after any substantive proceedings.
6 Apr 2023
Award standard 2B costs: SDCIC must pay liquidator costs and disbursements; Mr Wu entitled only to standard 2B costs and disbursements from the liquidator; rejected claim for two separate notices/affidavits and rejected uplifted costs for unreasonable refusal to settle because offers were late, the liquidator engaged and had statutory duties and the case was not hopeless.
12 Oct 2022
The Court denied indemnity and increased costs and costs on costs because the alleged misconduct was contested, much related to conduct predating the originating application, and not obvious or incontrovertible; the streamlined nature of notice-of-claim proceedings meant 2B scale costs were appropriate with small time additions (0.4 and 0.2 days), resulting in an award of 2B costs and disbursements of $8,313 to the applicant.
22 Sept 2022
Disbursements were awarded only where they met r14.12: filing and scheduling fees, photocopying, courier and the doctor's consultation and affidavit preparation were specific to and reasonably necessary for the appeal and reasonable in amount (the doctor's affidavit was determinative). Disbursements that predated the appeal, related to substantive proceedings, concerned travel not ordinarily claimable, or were payments to non-lawyers (online services) were refused.
26 Jul 2022
Costs follow the event; plaintiffs continued to pursue an unsuccessful interlocutory application once the defendants' position became clear and have not shown any basis to depart from the ordinary rule; defendants are entitled to 2B costs and disbursements totalling NZD 6,921.50 and the 25% uplift for costs on costs is declined because the court will not award costs on costs except in limited circumstances and no unreasonable conduct justifying uplift was found.
17 Jun 2022
The Court declined to award any costs. The adjournment was granted because the second counterclaim defendant could not return to New Zealand due to COVID border arrangements and his travel did not constitute a default warranting a wasted costs order. There were no special reasons to reserve costs of the interlocutory adjournment application and overall no party was entitled to costs, including costs of the costs memorandum.
3 May 2022
Indemnity costs were not justified because respondents' misconduct was not flagrant; s 178(9) permits consideration of some pre-proceeding conduct but Part 14 principles apply by analogy; applicant entitled to 2B scale costs with a 25% uplift limited to the originating application/affidavit and interlocutory application/memorandum filed 15 September 2021 (3.1 days, $9,261.25), plus 2B costs for further attendances (1.1 days, $2,629), disbursements $928, and no award for costs on costs — resulting in a total award of $12,818.25 to the applicant.
22 Dec 2021
The $21,000 paid into Court was the respondent's personal property (not security for costs) but was properly the subject of interim charging orders under r17.53; no compelling reason existed to refuse finalization of the orders; the Court could properly invoke r1.6 (and its inherent jurisdiction) to direct the Registrar to disburse the funds to satisfy the applicant's enforcement costs and to return any surplus to the respondent; accordingly the interim charging orders were made final and the Registrar was directed to pay the specified costs to the applicant and the balance plus accrued inter…
17 Dec 2021
The court declined to award increased costs under r 14.6(3)(d) because the evidence did not support an inference that the debtor deliberately delayed filing a debtor's petition to increase the creditors' costs; awarded standard 2B costs but deducted $956 from the claimed costs to remove an allowance for 'costs on costs', resulting in $5,258 plus disbursements of $1,050.