New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Indemnity for costs

Legal area

Court

19 May 2022

OFFICER v CM LAW TRUSTEES (2010) LTD [2022] NZHC 1098

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1098
Court

High Court

The Court concluded the intended proceedings are being brought in the best interests of the trust and estate and granted a Beddoe order approving the applicant to commence the removal proceedings and to be indemnified: the Estate will reimburse costs of the Beddoe application and will indemnify the applicant for reasonable costs to remove the co‑executor, and the Trust will indemnify the applicant for reasonable costs to remove trustees and to appoint Public Trust as sole trustee.
10 Jul 2020

HEARTLAND BANK LTD v HILLEND STATION LTD [2020] NZHC 1658

Citation

[2020] NZHC 1658
Court

High Court

Heartland proved Hillend's indebtedness of $590,948.41 and entitlement under the guarantee; contractual protection/exclusion clauses (Part B cl 9.2 and security deed cl 11.1) precluded liability for losses alleged from the exercise of Heartland's rights, and Mr Haines failed to prove a quantifiable loss sufficient to defeat recovery; Heartland was entitled to recover contractual indemnity legal costs and interest, so judgment for plaintiff for the total sum of $754,266.84 was entered.
28 Jun 2019

HEARTLAND BANK LTD v DOMECQ [2019] NZHC 1504

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1504
Court

High Court

The defendant, having entered into the loan and guarantee documents, is liable to the contractual default interest rates and to indemnify Heartland for expenses and legal and receivers' costs; the plaintiff's calculations and invoices justified the sums claimed and summary judgment awarding contractual interest and costs was appropriate.
16 Nov 2010

RJ & MH MCVITTY AND ORS V BANK OF NEW ZEALAND LIMITED AND ANOR HC WN CIV-2010-485-1164

Citation

openlaw-81c5d9ca_9818_4400_bc82_58cc53b2228d.pdf
Court

High Court

The strike-out application was dismissed because the documentary and solicitor evidence established that both directors (including Garrity via solicitor confirmation) authorised PDL to commence proceedings; however the receivers' stay application succeeded in part because the court was not satisfied the indemnities were demonstrably adequate and therefore stayed PDL's and MPL's causes of action until Mr McVitty provides (1) a signed indemnity, (2) a verified statement of personal assets and liabilities satisfactory to receivers and the Court, and (3) security in an amount and on terms satisfa…
25 Jun 2010

TUBBS V MCKENZIE AND ORS HC CHCH CIV-2005-409-002588

Citation

openlaw-201c327f_875a_4737_8a94_d25f21ac9da5.pdf
Court

High Court

The application for security for costs was dismissed because the plaintiff's affidavit established that BDO would underwrite any costs award, so there was no reason to believe the plaintiff would be unable to pay under r 5.45(1)(b); unwillingness to pay did not meet the statutory threshold.
22 May 2009

THAMES-COROMANDEL DISTRICT COUNCIL V COROMANDEL HERITAGE PROTECTION SOCIETY INC AND ANOR CA CA96/2008

Citation

openlaw-3cd817c7_8839_4c57_bf4b_f0671bfd44e0.pdf
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal because the High Court erred in relying on irrelevant pre‑proceeding matters (alleged deficient council record‑keeping and non‑response to a draft statement of claim) to displace the normal presumption that a plaintiff who discontinues must pay costs to the defendant; accordingly the High Court costs order was quashed and the society was ordered to pay the second respondent's costs of $10,943.76.
20 Aug 2008

AUCKLAND DISTRICT LAW SOCIETY V D A CONSTABLE SYNDICATE 386 HC AK CIV 2005-404-004322

Citation

openlaw-f900f29d_5ebd_4133_a13c_72e49707cba2.pdf
Court

High Court

The indemnity clause covers sums ADLS became legally liable to pay for claimant's costs and ADLS's defence costs arising from errors and omissions in its regulatory function; the insurer, by letters and conduct at the 20 Nov 2001 meeting, repudiated its obligation to indemnify in substance, thus ADLS was relieved from Condition 2 and entitled to recover $1,507,810.98 plus interest and costs.

New Zealand Case Law

OFFICER v CM LAW TRUSTEES (2010) LTD [2022] NZHC 1098

HEARTLAND BANK LTD v HILLEND STATION LTD [2020] NZHC 1658

HEARTLAND BANK LTD v DOMECQ [2019] NZHC 1504

RJ & MH MCVITTY AND ORS V BANK OF NEW ZEALAND LIMITED AND ANOR HC WN CIV-2010-485-1164

TUBBS V MCKENZIE AND ORS HC CHCH CIV-2005-409-002588

THAMES-COROMANDEL DISTRICT COUNCIL V COROMANDEL HERITAGE PROTECTION SOCIETY INC AND ANOR CA CA96/2008

AUCKLAND DISTRICT LAW SOCIETY V D A CONSTABLE SYNDICATE 386 HC AK CIV 2005-404-004322