B Property Group Limited v Ecotech Commercial (NZ) Limited

[2020] NZHC 3313

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND NELSON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHAKATŪ ROHE

CIV-2020-442-013

[2020] NZHC 3313

BETWEEN

B PROPERTY GROUP LIMITED

Plaintiff

AND

ECOTECH COMMERCIAL (NZ) LIMITED

Defendant

Appearances:	J Burley for plaintiff G Praat for defendant
Judgment:	15 December 2020

COSTS JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE JOHNSTON

[On the papers]

[1]                 In my substantive judgment dated 12 October 2020 I made an order pursuant to r 31.11 of the High Court Rules 2016 staying the plaintiff’s proceeding and prohibiting advertising of its application to wind up the defendant company on the basis that Ecotech had established that there was a genuine issue between the parties to be tried not capable of being dealt with in the context of liquidation proceedings.

[2]In my concluding paragraph I said:

[28] Not having heard from counsel in relation to costs I reserve these. My preliminary view is that Ecotech is entitled to its costs on a 2B basis. With that indication I expect that counsel will be able to deal with costs without further reference to the Court. However, if that proves impossible the parties can file memoranda in the usual way.

[3]                 Clearly counsel have been unable to resolve costs. I now have memoranda from Mr Praat for the defendant, the first dated 13 November and the second dated 30 November. Ecotech seeks costs on a 2B basis. Mr Praat has made every effort to

B PROPERTY GROUP LIMITED v ECOTECH COMMERCIAL (NZ) LIMITED [2020] NZHC 3313

[15 December 2020]

engage BPG’s solicitors. He served his original memorandum and invited BPG’s solicitors to reply within 14 days. When they did not, Mr Praat filed his second memorandum confirming that he had had no response and seeking a costs order.

[4]                 The Registrar communicated with BPG’s solicitors on 14 December requesting a response by 2.00 pm on 15 December 2020. She received a response from BPG’s solicitors saying they did not have instructions on costs and did not anticipate filing a memorandum by the deadline provided.

[5]                 Mr Praat’s calculation of 2B costs appears to me to be correct, and I order the plaintiff to pay to the defendant a total of $11,543 (inclusive of costs and disbursements).

Associate Judge Johnston

Solicitors:

McVeagh Fleming, Auckland for plaintiff Knapps Lawyers, Nelson for defendant