New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Set-off of costs

Legal area

Court

9 Dec 2022

NEW ZEALAND BLOODSTOCK FINANCE & LEASING LTD v JONES [2022] NZHC 3333

Citation

[2022] NZHC 3333
Court

High Court

Weighing competing interests, there was a real and substantial risk of miscarriage of justice if New Zealand Bloodstock were required to pay $21,032.00 because the respondent owed the applicant a much larger sum ($655,444.57), had not made payments and appeared impecunious, and set-off was available; on that basis the court exercised its discretion under r 17.29 to grant a stay of enforcement of the Harland J costs order.
17 Dec 2021

BLOMFIELD v MR A & THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2021] NZHC 3550

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3550
Court

High Court

No allowance for second counsel was made because the proceeding was of ordinary complexity and lacked exceptional features required to justify a second counsel award; costs were fixed on a 2B scale with disbursements in the sum specified and enforcement of that award was stayed to permit parties to resolve set-off issues about prior costs awards.
25 Feb 2021

BILKEY v KYRIAK and [2021] NZHC 264

Citation

[2021] NZHC 264
Court

High Court

The appeal is dismissed. The High Court held the District Court Judge did not err: set-off under r 14.16 did not apply because appellants' success on the fence was a partial defence rather than a counterclaim and was appropriately reflected by a 50% reduction under r 14.7(d); appellants' pre-trial letters did not satisfy rr 14.10-14.11 so could not be used under that regime, and respondents had reasonable justification to refuse the offers so r 14.7(e)(v) did not require further cost reduction; a 5% additional reduction for discovery non-compliance and the late defamation application was with…
3 Mar 2020

HEALE v IAG NEW ZEALAND LTD [2020] NZHC 352

Citation

[2020] NZHC 352
Court

High Court

IAG was entitled to costs for its successful applications to join QBE, Buildtech and EDC as third parties but must not recover duplicated costs arising from multiple filed interlocutory applications; IAGs fair and reasonable costs for the successful applications were fixed at $12,832 and apportioned among QBE ($6,416), Buildtech ($2,138.67), EDC ($2,138.67) and the Heales ($2,138.67); the abandoned applications to join the same parties as defendants entitled those parties to costs ($2,117 each for QBE, Buildtech and EDC and $2,227 for the Heales); costs between IAG and the Heales, Buildtech a…
26 Jun 2018

EBR HOLDINGS LIMITED (IN LIQ) v VAN DUYN [2018] NZHC 1542

Citation

[2018] NZHC 1542
Court

High Court

The High Court had jurisdiction under s 48(1) to determine District Court costs. The appropriate division of costs is to award plaintiffs District Court scale costs (excluding the transfer application) uplifted 50% ($31,506), award defendants costs in respect of the transfer application (to be set off), and award plaintiffs overall costs in the High Court aggregated and adjusted to a net figure of $127,747.50 together with specified disbursements; disbursements related to the transfer belong to defendants.
10 Nov 2016

VICTORIA QUARTER NO. 1 LIMITED (AS TRUSTEE OF THE VICTORIA QUARTER NO. 1 TRUST) v FBB HOLDINGS LIMITED [2016] NZHC 2691

Citation

[2016] NZHC 2691
Court

High Court

The second defendant failed to comply with the court's direction to quantify and apportion costs; absent that information the court limits the second defendant to one‑sixth of the quantified scale costs ($5,400) and, given the first defendant's liquidation and the second defendant's control of the first defendant, the second defendant's costs award is to be set off against the plaintiff's costs award.
16 Apr 2008

SAMOAN ASSEMBLIES OF GOD IN NZ & ANOR V ASSEMBLIES OF GOD IN NZ INC & ORS HC AK CIV 2005-404-005398

Citation

openlaw-982bd8c7_1c18_4599_9e12_7d63b2e0ddf0.pdf
Court

High Court

Because SAOGNZ had tendered payment but the funds were frozen by court order (no wilful default), the 'unless' order was inappropriate; SAOGNZ was entitled to costs for its November 2007 injunction (including second counsel), and under r53 the existing costs awards are to be set off producing a net payment by AOGNZ of $545; claims for 'wasted costs' are reserved until final determination of the substantive proceedings.

New Zealand Case Law

NEW ZEALAND BLOODSTOCK FINANCE & LEASING LTD v JONES [2022] NZHC 3333

BLOMFIELD v MR A & THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2021] NZHC 3550

BILKEY v KYRIAK and [2021] NZHC 264

HEALE v IAG NEW ZEALAND LTD [2020] NZHC 352

EBR HOLDINGS LIMITED (IN LIQ) v VAN DUYN [2018] NZHC 1542

VICTORIA QUARTER NO. 1 LIMITED (AS TRUSTEE OF THE VICTORIA QUARTER NO. 1 TRUST) v FBB HOLDINGS LIMITED [2016] NZHC 2691

SAMOAN ASSEMBLIES OF GOD IN NZ & ANOR V ASSEMBLIES OF GOD IN NZ INC & ORS HC AK CIV 2005-404-005398