New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

WATI v SHARMA [2020] NZHC 1847

Citation

[2020] NZHC 1847

Court

High Court

As the successful appellant was entitled to costs on scale B the court awarded $9,000 (reflecting the five‑day allocation, adjustments for steps not required and allowance for call memoranda and sealing), but refused to allow costs for the costs application as a sanction because counsel contributed to the incorrect sealing of a costs order.

20 Dec 2011

COMFORTPLUS LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) V PORTSMOUTH INVESTMENTS LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) HC CHCH CIV-2010-409-002043

Citation: openlaw-2e0bdcc3_4fbc_4754_afec_58b56606d239.pdf
Court: High Court

The applicants have not satisfied the Court at this interlocutory stage that they were impeded by irrelevant discovery so as to justify an order for costs under r 8.29; because relevance under the Peruvian Guano approach and the plaintiffs' asserted lines of enquiry may only reliably be assessed once briefs of evidence and issues at trial are clarified, the application for special costs is adjourned to be considered when overall costs of the litigation are addressed.