IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY
CIV-2014-409-000866 [2016] NZHC 2521
UNDER the Property Law Act 2007 BETWEEN
ALPINE SUN LIMITED Applicant
AND
HORTIVENTURE LIMITED Respondent
Judgment: 21 October 2016
JUDGMENT OF COLLINS [Costs]
Introduction
[1] On 8 September 2016, I struck out an application for early possession by Alpine Sun Ltd (Alpine). In doing so I awarded costs in favour of Hortiventure Ltd (Hortiventure) on a scale 2B basis.
[2] The parties returned to the Court to seek rulings in relation to aspects of the costs order which I made.
[3] I will deal succinctly with each of the issues.
Costs on costs
[4] Mr Summerlee, counsel for Hortiventure, asks for $892 for costs in relation to the costs memorandum.
[5] There is no absolute bar on costs.1
1 Tyre Collection Services Ltd v Le Roy [2016] NZHC 898; TTAH Ltd v Koninklijke Ten Cate NV
ALPINE SUN LIMITED v HORTIVENTURE LIMITED [2016] NZHC 2521 [21 October 2016]
[6] I can see no reason for costs to be awarded in relation to the costs memorandum in this case. The memorandum is appropriately brief. I am reluctant to award costs on a costs application in part because it leads to an infinite spiralling loop of costs applications.
Bundle
[7] There is a dispute about who prepared the bundle for the strike-out application.
[8] Hortiventure says it prepared the common bundle.
[9] In my assessment, while Hortiventure may have taken some steps to prepare items that would go into a bundle, it seems that Alpine actually assembled the final version of the bundle, printed it and added in significant portions.
[10] In my assessment, at most, Hortiventure should get only one-quarter of the costs for this step.
Opposition to early possession application and supporting affidavit
[11] Ms Meares, counsel for Alpine is correct when she says the proper award for a notice in opposition and supporting affidavit is $3,980 as per item 38 in the schedule. Hortiventure is entitled to 75 per cent of $3,980 to reflect the fact that
25 per cent was awarded in the stay application.
Solicitors:
Wynn Williams, Christchurch for Applicant
Parry Field Lawyers, Christchurch for Respondent
D B Collins J
- AGLC
- Alpine Sun Limited v Hortiventure Limited [2016] NZHC 2521
- Case
- [2016] NZHC 2521
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court considered whether costs should be awarded for the preparation of a costs memorandum, the preparation of the bundle for the strike-out application, and the opposition to the early possession application. The court found that no costs should be awarded for the costs memorandum as it was appropriately brief. Regarding the bundle, the court determined that while Hortiventure took some steps towards its preparation, Alpine ultimately assembled the final version. Consequently, the court awarded Hortiventure only a quarter of the costs associated with the bundle. For the opposition to the early possession application, the court confirmed that the proper award was as per the schedule, with Hortiventure entitled to 75% of the amount, reflecting a previous award in the stay application.
The court's reasoning led to a conclusion that no additional costs should be awarded for the costs memorandum, a limited award for the bundle preparation, and a specific amount for the opposition to the early possession application. This outcome ensures that the costs remain reasonable and proportionate to the work involved.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.