Baker v Waimakuku Whanau Trust Board Incorporated

Case

[2014] NZHC 255

24 February 2014


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Baker v Waimakuku Whanau Trust Board Incorporated [2014] NZHC 255 [2014] NZHC 255 24 February 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Baker v Waimakuku Whanau Trust Board Incorporated involved an application for costs under s 99A(1)(b) of the Judicature Act 1908, following the involvement of an amicus in a trust dispute. The applicants, trustees of the Thomas Baker Whanau Trust, sought an order for costs incurred by the amicus to be paid by the respondent, Waimakuku Whanau Trust Board Incorporated. The central issue before the Court was whether the respondent should bear any liability for the costs incurred by the amicus due to the respondent's tactics which the Court found to have unnecessarily prolonged the proceedings.

The Court found that the respondent's initiatives had indeed caused the proceedings to be protracted and had increased the work required by the amicus. In relation to the interlocutory steps, the Court determined that these were not necessary had the proceedings been confined to the relevant issues concerning the trust deed. Therefore, the costs of $8,712 incurred during these steps were to be borne by the respondent. For the substantive hearing, the Court assessed that while the core work of the amicus was justified, the respondent's actions had somewhat increased the workload. Consequently, 25% of the substantive hearing costs, amounting to $9,847.50, were to be borne by the respondent. Additionally, 25% of the disbursements, totalling $920.74, were also to be paid by the respondent. The remaining costs and disbursements were to be paid by the Crown.

In light of these findings, the Court concluded that the total order in favor of the amicus against the respondent amounted to $19,480.24. The Court further noted that if the respondent lacked the capacity to meet these liabilities, it might consider attributing the costs to Mr. Nigel Baker, who was closely associated with the respondent's instructions. Finally, the Court decided that the balance of the costs not borne by the respondent should be paid out of public funds, given the Crown's role in establishing the trust fund and the need for objective guidance in resolving the beneficiaries' interests. The total liability of the Crown was quantified as $32,304.70.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Civil Litigation & Procedure

Legal Concepts

  • Costs

  • Amicus Curiae

  • Judicial Review

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

4

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0