Far North District Council v Phillips

[2014] NZHC 2604

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGAREI REGISTRY

CIV-2014-488-0053 [2014] NZHC 2604

IN THE MATTER

of an application under the Local

Government (Rating)Act 2002

BETWEEN

FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL Plaintiff

AND

GRAY ANDREW PHILLIPS Defendant

Hearing:	22 October 2014
Appearances:	JGA Day for Plaintiff GA Phillips in person
Judgment:	22 October 2014

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF TOOGOOD J

FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL v PHILLIPS [2014] NZHC 2604 [22 October 2014]

[1]      In this proceeding, the plaintiff sought to recover rates arrears and penalties from the defendant who owns various properties in Northland.   The statement of claim sought judgment in the amount of $217,281.18, in addition to any further rates arrears, penalties and fines which might accrue between the time of the preparation of the claim (which was undated but was filed with the Court on 9 April 2014) and the date of judgment, together with costs and disbursements.

[2]      In his statement of defence, Mr Phillips did not seriously contest the amount of the plaintiff’s claim nor did he dispute that the rates were properly payable by him in accordance with the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002.  His opposition to the claim was based on counterclaims which he said more than offset the debt he owed to the plaintiff Council.

[3]      The counterclaims may be summarised as follows:

(a)      The  plaintiff’s  right  to  extract  and  convey  water  from  one  of Mr Phillips’s   properties   expired   in   1961   with   the   result   that Mr Phillips   was   owed   compensation   for   the   taking   of   water amounting to $380,000.

(b)      Unspecified issues arising under the Treaty of Waitangi.

(c)      Damages owed to Mr Phillips as a consequence of a landslip which occurred through the fault of the Council, causing him loss.

[4]      When this proceeding was called for hearing this morning, Mr Phillips told me that he had held some discussions with Mr Day, counsel for the plaintiff, which suggested that the dispute between the parties might be capable of settlement.  After a short adjournment, I was informed by Mr Day and Mr Phillips that a settlement had in fact been achieved, the net result of which was that the Council’s claims for the payment of arrears of rates and consequential indebtedness and costs would be satisfied by a payment by Mr Phillips of $200,000 in total.

[5]      Mr Phillips told me that he believed the settlement would enable him to have fruitful discussions with the Council and its agencies concerning remaining issues between them.  He said that he had taken on board the importance of notifying the Council, when he paid a rates instalment, which of his several properties was the subject of the payment.

[6]      By consent I ordered:

(a)      judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $184,646.05 on account of arrears of rates and penalties owing in respect of the properties named in the proceeding;

(b)the defendant to pay to the plaintiff the sum of $15,353.95 by way of costs and disbursements; and

(c)       that the defendant’s counterclaims are dismissed.

……………………………..

Toogood J