Madsen-Ries v Just

[2013] NZHC 2851

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CIV 2012-404-003944 [2013] NZHC 2851

UNDER  the Companies Act 1993

IN THE MATTER             of the liquidation of Green Securities Limited (In Liquidation) and Presidential Homes New Zealand Limmited (In Liquidation)

BETWEEN  VIVIEN JUDITH MADSEN-RIES and HENRY DAVID LEVIN as Liquidators of Green Securities Limited (In Liquidation) and Presidential Homes New Zealand Limited (In Liquidation)

Plaintiffs

ANDSTEPHEN RUSSELL JUST Defendant

Appearances:           On the papers.

Judgment:                30 October 2013 at 11:30am

JUDGMENT OF ANDREWS J [Costs]

This judgment is delivered by me on 30 October 2013 at 11.30am pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

..................................................... Registrar / Deputy Registrar

Solicitors:

Meredith Connell, Auckland

MADSEN-RIES and ANOR v JUST [2013] NZHC 2851 [30 October 2013]

[1]      The plaintiffs succeeded in their proceeding against the defendant for breach of his duties as a director under ss 135, 136, and 137 of the Companies Act 1993, and has been ordered to contribute to the assets of Green Securities Limited (In Liquidation)  and  Presidential  Homes  New  Zealand  Limited  (In  Liquidation), pursuant to s 301 of the Act.1

[2]      I have now received memoranda as to costs.  The plaintiff agrees that scale

2B costs are appropriate, but claims $27,000, a little less than the amount payable according to the scale.  The plaintiffs also seek disbursements of $8,303.51, the bulk of which relate to the setting down fee and hearing fee (together, $6,283.60), and the filing fee ($1,329.20).

[3]      Mr Just has filed a response to the plaintiffs’ claim for costs.  He contends at that they should not be awarded costs.  In large measure, the matters raised by Mr Just repeat matters which he raised at trial.

[4]      Pursuant to r 14.2(a) of the High Court Rules, the general principle as to determining costs is that the party who fails should pay costs to the party who succeeds.   Pursuant to r 14.7, the Court may refuse to make an order for costs, or may reduce the costs otherwise payable, in certain circumstances.

[5]      In this case, the matters raised by Mr Just were rejected when they were raised at trial.  I am not satisfied that any of the matters are such that costs should either be refused, or reduced.

[6]      Accordingly, I order costs in favour of the plaintiffs, in the sum of $27,000, together with disbursements of $8,303.51.

Andrews

1      Madsen-Ries v Just [2013] NZHC 2254.