Arnold v Fairfax New Zealand Limited

[2016] NZHC 379

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

CIV-2015-485-484 [2016] NZHC 379

UNDER

the Defamation Act 1992

BETWEEN

KAREN FRANCES ARNOLD Plaintiff

AND

FAIRFAX NEW ZEALAND LIMITED First Defendant

TIMOTHY RICHARD SHADBOLT Second Defendant

On the papers
Counsel:	P A McKnight and A J Romanos for Plaintiff R K P Stewart and R G Cahn for First Defendant F E Geiringer for Second Defendant
Judgment:	8 March 2016

JUDGMENT OF CLIFFORD J (COSTS)

[1]      It is not unusual for a variety of orders to be sought in an interlocutory application.  The fact that some only of those orders may be sought as against all parties, and others as regards one or some only of those parties, does not in my view mean that there is more than one application to be considered from a costs perspective.  On that basis:

(a)     I accept Mr Geiringer’s memorandum filed on 6 March 2016;

(b)I do not accept the analysis that the second defendant responded to two separate applications;

ARNOLD v FAIRFAX NEW ZEALAND LIMITED [2016] NZHC 379 [8 March 2016]

(c)     I consider that a 25 per cent discount over-states Ms Arnold’s limited

success;

(d)     I consider that a 12.5 per cent reduction reflects that limited success. [2]         I therefore determine:

(a)     that the plaintiff will pay costs of $5,908.00 to the first defendant in

respect of the plaintiff’s interlocutory application heard on 2 February

2016; and

(b)     that the plaintiff will pay costs of $5,167.50 to the second defendant.

[3]      High Court Rule 14.8 is clear.  Costs on interlocutory applications must be fixed in accordance with the Rules when the application is determined and become payable when they are fixed, in the absence of “special reasons to the contrary”.  No such special reasons have been advanced.  The rule will therefore apply on its terms. I do not understand that the concepts of “costs in any event” and “costs in the proceedings” feature in this Court’s Rules.

“Clifford J”

Solicitors:

Langford Law, Wellington for Plaintiff

Izard Weston, Wellington for First Defendant

Preston Russell Law, Invercargill for Second Defendant