Independent Fisheries Limited v Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery

Independent Fisheries Limited and others brought a claim against the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery and others, seeking damages for the alleged destruction of their properties caused by the Canterbury earthquakes. The case was heard in the High Court of New Zealand, Christchurch Registry. The applicants sought to have their legal costs covered by the respondents on the basis that the proceedings were in category 3 and involved complex issues, and that the first respondent's actions were unreasonable and vexatious.

The court had to decide whether the costs incurred by the applicants should be awarded on a 3C basis, as initially suggested, or on a different basis as argued by the respondents. The applicants argued for a 3C basis for all items, while the respondents submitted that certain steps should be on a B basis and that the costs award should be lower than that claimed by the applicants. The court considered the arguments and submissions made by both parties and assessed the complexity and nature of the proceedings.

The court found that the proceeding was indeed in category 3, given its complexity and the additional work involved in the pre-trial orders made by Miller J. However, the court accepted that one of the items should be adjusted to 1.25 days instead of 2.5 days as sought by the applicants. The court also approved the disbursements claimed by the applicants. The court ultimately decided to award the applicants costs on a 3C basis for all items, as requested, and granted leave for the respondents to file a memorandum in reply to address certain points raised in the applicants' submissions.

The court's decision on costs followed its earlier judgment on the merits of the case, in which it found that the applicants were not entitled to damages for the destruction of their properties caused by the Canterbury earthquakes. The court held that the applicants' properties were not protected by the Resource Management Act 1991 and that the respondents' actions in relation to the earthquakes were not unlawful. The court's judgment on costs is an important aspect of the overall resolution of the dispute, as it determines the financial outcome for the parties involved.