Han v Xue - [2025] NZHC 1383

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2021-404-1717

[2025] NZHC 1383

UNDER Part 18 of the High Court Rules 2016

IN THE MATTER

of a declaratory order pursuant to the Declaratory Judgments Act 1908

BETWEEN

WENNING HAN

First Plaintiff

YUNYUE ZHU
Second Plaintiff

AND

JINXING XUE

Defendant

Hearing: On the papers

Counsel:

R O Parmenter for the First Plaintiff

No appearance by or for the Second Plaintiff J A McMillan for the Defendant

Judgment:

29 May 2025

JUDGMENT OF GAULT J

(Costs)

This judgment was delivered by me on 29 May 2025 at 4:00 pm pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules 2016.
Registrar/Deputy Registrar

……………………………………

Solicitors / Counsel:
Mr R O Parmenter, Barrister, Auckland
Mr R Hollyman KC (counsel for the Defendant), Barrister, Auckland
Mr J A McMillan and Ms S M Singh, Dentons Kensington Swan, Auckland Copy to:
Ms T Chan (second plaintiff’s instructing solicitor), Teresa Chan Law Ltd, Dunedin

HAN v XUE [2025] NZHC 1383 [29 May 2025]

[1] Following the judgment of Moore J dated 17 December 2024 concerning an unsuccessful housing development venture,1 and the Judge’s retirement, the issue of costs has been referred to me for determination on the papers.

[2] The result of the proceeding, including as to costs, was set out at the conclusion of Moore J’s judgment:

Result

[141]These findings lead to the following orders:

(a)The claims of Mr Han and Ms Zhu are dismissed.

(b)Orders in terms of paragraphs 72, 79, 82 and 89 of the amended statement of defence dated 19 June 2023 are granted, namely:

(i)against Mr Han for:

•payment of the principal sum of $3.5 million (on a joint and several basis with Ms Zhu);

•interest in accordance with s 9 of the Interest on Money Claims Act 2016, from the due date for payment (being 16 October 2020) until the date of payment; and

•costs.

(ii)Against Ms Zhu for:

•payment of the principal sum of $3.5 million (on a joint and several basis with Mr Han);

•interest in accordance with s 9 of the Interest on Money Claims Act 2016 from the due date for payment (being 16 October 2020) until the date of payment;

•a declaration that Mr Xue may exercise his rights in respect of the property as mortgage under s 119(2) of the Property Law Act 2007; and

•costs and disbursements on a solicitor/basis, pursuant to cl 4.1 of the Guarantee.

1 Han v Xue [2024] NZHC 1872.

Costs

[142] Mr Xue, as the successful party, is entitled to costs. I direct that the parties are to consult with a view to agreeing on costs. If no agreement is reached, the parties are to file memoranda not exceeding three pages in length (excluding appendices) within 20 working days of this release date of this judgment. The question of costs will then be determined on the papers by another Judge.

[3] Mr Han and Mr Xue have reached agreement in…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Han v Xue

Details

AGLC: Han v Xue [2025] NZHC 1383
Case: [2025] NZHC 1383
Decision Date: 29 May 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of New Zealand Auckland registry considered a case involving Wen Ning Han and Yun Yue Zhu against Jin Xing Xue. The plaintiffs sought a declaratory order under the Declaratory Judgments Act 1908, related to an unsuccessful housing development venture. The court had to determine the costs associated with the proceedings, following the earlier judgment by Moore J which dismissed the plaintiffs' claims and ordered them to pay the defendant, Mr Xue, a sum of $3.5 million in principal, interest, and costs. The court was also required to address the costs incurred by Mr Xue during the enforcement of the judgment and guarantee, which totaled $778,139.22.

The court reviewed the memorandum submitted by Mr Xue's counsel and the affidavit from his solicitors, which detailed the costs incurred during the enforcement proceedings. Mr Xue's counsel argued that the costs were reasonable given the circumstances, including changes in legal representation for the plaintiffs and delays in the trial. The plaintiffs' second plaintiff, Yun Yue Zhu, did not participate in the proceedings or respond to the costs application. The court accepted that the costs claimed were related to the proceedings and were reasonable, granting Mr Xue the costs he sought.

Gault J determined that Mr Han and Mr Xue had reached an agreement on the scale costs and disbursements, which were to be paid by Mr Han. Regarding the costs against Ms Zhu, Gault J ruled that she must pay Mr Xue $778,139.22 in solicitor/client costs and disbursements, subject to a reduction if Mr Han made the agreed payment. The court made orders accordingly, directing that Mr Han pay Mr Xue $50,309.50 in scale costs and $24,546.20 in disbursements, while Ms Zhu was to pay Mr Xue $778,139.22 in costs and disbursements, less any amount paid by Mr Han.

Orders