Hill Country Corporation Ltd v Hastings District Council HC Napier Civ-2010-441-222

Case

[2011] NZHC 81

19 April 2011


IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

NAPIER REGISTRY

CIV-2010-441-222

IN THE MATTER OF the Resource Management Act 1991 AND

IN THE MATTER OF     an appeal from a decision of the High

Court pursuant to s 299 of the Act

BETWEEN  HILL COUNTRY CORPORATI ON LTD

Appellant

AND  HASTINGS DISTRICT COUNCIL

Respondent

Hearing:      (On the papers)

Counsel:          J M von Dadelszen for Respondent

M E J Macfarlane and L J Blomfield for Appellant

Judgment:      19 April 2011

JUDGMENT OF BREWER J
(Costs)

SOLICITORS

Sainsbury Logan & Williams (Napier) for Appellant Bannister & von Dadelszen (Hastings) for Respondent

  1. On 17 December 2010, I refused the appellant leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal on the basis that the appeal raised no question of law that was of general and public importance. In accordance with r 14.8(1) I awarded costs to the respondent on a category 2B basis.

  2. The respondent now applies for increased costs pursuant to r 14.6(3)(a) of the High Court Rules. The respondent submits that its actual preparation time in the leave proceeding substantially exceeded the allowance under schedule 3. It seeks an increase on its preparation allowance from 0.25 days to 2 days.

  3. While the setting of costs is a matter of discretion,[1] departure from the standard costs regime is generally justified only where the applicant can show that its reasonable costs substantially exceeded the prescribed time allocated.[2]

    [1] Rule 14.1.

    [2] Mansfield Drycleaners Ltd v Quinny's Thycleaning (Dentice Drycleaning Upper Hutt) Ltd (2002) 16 PRNZ 662 (CA) at [27]; Glaister v Amalgamated Dairies Ltd [2004] 2 NZLR 606 (CA) at [19]; Holdfast NZ Ltd v Selleys Pty Ltd (2005) 17 PRNZ 897 (CA) at [44].

  4. In the present proceeding it would be excessive to increase costs on preparation eightfold. The issues raised were not new; the proceeding was straightforward.

  5. The appellant submits than an increase on preparation time from 0.25 to 0.5 days might be justified. I agree and make an order adjusting my previous costs order accordingly.

    Brewer J


Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

1

Statutory Material Cited

0