2 Jun 2022
Defendants are entitled to recover their actual and reasonable indemnity costs pursuant to the contract and Cooke J's earlier order; plaintiffs' partial success on quantum did not displace that entitlement; costs are awarded to the defendants down to the date of judgment on a 2B basis and disbursements are awarded as claimed.
27 May 2022
The court held the NZ Legal charge of $1,856.25 was reasonable for preparing the documents to defend the interlocutory application; expert accountant evidence was reasonably necessary because the defendants challenged the plaintiff's impecuniosity, but the time claimed was excessive and was reduced from 18.3 hours to a reasonable 8 hours at $400/hr with applicable charges, resulting in an award of $3,634 for expert fees; total disbursements of $5,600.25 were ordered payable by the defendants to the plaintiff.
27 Jul 2021
Plaintiff was not entitled to solicitor-client costs because the notice of assignment conveyed only the existing debt and not any separate contractual right to indemnity costs; the Questionnaire did not clearly create an entitlement to solicitor-client costs and the assignor named in the assignment differed from the entity on the Questionnaire; plaintiff made a late unexplained change to seek indemnity costs after counsel representations induced reliance by defendant; exercising discretion, the Court refused indemnity costs and awarded only the previously claimed 2B scale costs of $3,346 and…
7 Apr 2021
The High Court held s155 of the Accident Compensation Act 2001 permits non-lawyer representatives to have full rights of audience in ACC appeals and there is no general statutory bar to charging a fee; District Court may award costs to non-lawyer advocates but the District Court Rules scale is only a guideline and must be adapted: awards must observe the indemnity and reasonableness principles, use the schedule banded time allocations, and for lay advocates the daily lawyer rates should generally be adjusted downward (guideline of 50% of Category 1 daily rate was endorsed for straightforward…
17 Sept 2020
The non-parties, being separate legal entities that reasonably opposed the non-party discovery application and succeeded, are entitled to be reimbursed by the plaintiff for their actual and reasonable costs and disbursements on a GST-exclusive basis; the plaintiff's arguments about related proceedings did not displace the usual principle of indemnifying non-parties.
27 Feb 2019
On an overall assessment of the papers and circumstances (complexity, competing proceedings, litigation guardian requirement and stop-start three year conduct), the Court applied a 20% reduction for duplication/overrun and fixed the plaintiff's reasonable costs at $40,000 inclusive of GST and disbursements to be paid from the deceased's estate; the Court declined to defer to or order a Law Society costs revision and resolved the issue on the papers.
6 Nov 2018
Clause 14 of the loan agreement entitled the plaintiffs to indemnity costs for enforcement litigation; the claimed indemnity was reduced to remove GST (on the assumption plaintiffs are GST-registered), to eliminate duplication with earlier wasted costs and to exclude costs for steps not reasonably necessary, resulting in an indemnity costs award of $111,736.95 with disbursements exclusive of GST to be fixed by the Registry.
2 Aug 2018
The claim by Smith and Partners to recover its incurred discovery expenses is dismissed because the evidence did not establish the expenses were reasonably incurred or were compelled by the liquidators; a non‑party may withhold compliance until liability for payment is established, and absent proof of compulsion and reasonableness the court will not order reimbursement.
11 May 2018
The court awarded a partial contribution to disbursements because lay litigants may recover reasonable and necessary disbursements; on the evidence the court apportioned and allowed $620 for technical/home‑help assistance and $1,000 for printing/stationery as a generous but proportionate contribution, totaling $1,620.00.
14 Dec 2017
The court granted leave to apply for leave to appeal out of time and granted leave to appeal on the discrete question of law whether the reasonableness of expert witness costs should be assessed taking into account that the client was self-represented, recognizing that the issue raises a question of general/public importance that could justify a further appeal.