Bowles v Beasley

[2017] NZHC 180

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

WELLINGTON REGISTRY

CIV-2016-485-608605

[2017] NZHC 180

UNDER

the Administration Act 1969

IN THE ESTATE

of Edna Alice Beasley (deceased)

BETWEEN

JUDITH EDNA BOWLES, EDWARD JOHN BEASLEY AND IRENE ANNE JOSEPH

Applicants

AND

RAYMOND BEASLEY

Respondent

Hearing:	On the papers
Counsel:	M J McKay for applicants D F Tyree for Respondent
Judgment:	16 February 2017

JUDGMENT OF COLLINS J

Costs

[1]    By memorandum dated 31 September 2016 the applicants agreed to renounce their appointment as executors of the estate of the late Edna Beasley. The parties agreed to Prudential Guardian obtaining probate of the will of Edna Beasley and that costs be reserved. The Court made orders to that effect.

[2]    Since then the parties have failed to reach agreement as to costs. Disputes have arisen about the appropriateness of evidence being referred to in a memorandum and affidavit, and the scale of costs that is applicable. There is also a dispute as to whether or not appropriate steps were taken to settle this matter before proceedings were issued.

BOWLES & ORS v BEASLEY [2017] NZHC 180 [16 February 2017]

[3]    I have viewed the file and record that the parties agreed to the Court determining the issue of costs by relying on the materials in the papers.

[4]    While it has taken some time for this matter to be resolved it is a straight forward case that bears many of the characteristics of In re Tai in which Baragwanath J awarded the applicants costs on a scale 1A basis.1

[5]    In my assessment, that is the appropriate level of costs that the applicants should receive in this case. I order accordingly.

D B Collins J

Solicitors:

Malley & Co, Christchurch for Applicants Rainey Collins, Wellington for Respondent

1      In Re Tai Rotorua HC CIV-2006-463-669, 7 February 2007.