IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY
I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE
CIV-2018-409-612
[2022] NZHC 1155
BETWEEN ZHAOHUA LI
Plaintiff
AND
YI HENG (HENRY) WU
First Defendant
AND
ZHONGXIU FAN
Second Defendant
CIV-2018-409-238 BETWEEN
ZHONGXIU FAN
PlaintiffAND
YI HENG (HENRY) WU
First Defendant
AND
ZHAOHUA LI
Second Defendant
Submissions (in writing): 18 May 2022 and 23 May 2022 Appearances:
A M Corry for Z H Li (Plaintiff/Second Defendant/Respondent) Z X Fan (Second Defendant/Plaintiff/Applicant) in person
Judgment:
24 May 2022
JUDGMENT OF OSBORNE J
(Fixing costs)
This judgment was delivered by me on 24 May 2022 at 2.30 pm pursuant to Rule 11.5
of the High Court Rules
Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date:
LI v WU [2022] NZHC 1155 [24 May 2022]
[1] The Court previously dismissed Ms Fan’s application for a stay of enforcement.1 In doing so, I ordered Ms Fan to pay to Ms Li the costs and disbursements of the application on an indemnity basis.2
[2] Memoranda have now been filed. Ms Corry for Ms Li has provided full details of her time attendances and costs and disbursements. The costs and disbursements total the modest sum of $1,430. That is clearly an appropriate sum to fix by way of indemnity costs and disbursements.
[3] Ms Fan, in her memorandum, has not challenged the reasonableness of Ms Li’s costs and disbursements. Instead she has reverted to an old, rejected3 contention that she has a subsisting claim in the -238 proceeding that has yet to be determined.
[4] In relation to the costs and disbursements awarded to Ms Li in the judgment dated 1 March 2022, I fix:
(a)costs in the sum of $1,380; and
(b)disbursements in the sum of $50.
Osborne J
Barrister:
A M Corry Barrister, Christchurch
Copy to:
Ms Fan
2 At [41(b)].
3 At [25].
- AGLC
- Li v Wu [2022] NZHC 1155
- Case
- [2022] NZHC 1155
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue was whether the indemnity costs and disbursements claimed by Zhaohua Li were reasonable and justified, given the circumstances of the case. The court had to consider the nature and extent of the legal services provided, the complexity of the issues, and the outcomes achieved. Additionally, the court had to address Zhongxiu Fan's argument that she had a subsisting claim in another proceeding that had not yet been determined.
The court reviewed the submissions and evidence provided by the parties. Zhaohua Li's counsel, A M Corry, presented detailed time attendances and an itemised breakdown of costs and disbursements, totaling $1,430. Zhongxiu Fan did not contest the reasonableness of these costs but argued that she had an ongoing claim that needed to be considered. The court found that the costs and disbursements claimed by Zhaohua Li were reasonable and appropriate, given the modest sum and the services provided. The court also dismissed Zhongxiu Fan's contention that her ongoing claim should affect the determination of costs in this proceeding.
In conclusion, the court fixed the indemnity costs and disbursements to be paid by Zhongxiu Fan to Zhaohua Li. The court awarded $1,380 in costs and $50 in disbursements, totaling $1,430. The judgment clarified that this award was final and not subject to any further claims or counterclaims between the parties.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.