Silver Harbour Capital Trustee Limited v Lau

[2024] NZHC 225

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2023-404-2892

[2024] NZHC 225

BETWEEN

SILVER HARBOUR CAPITAL TRUSTEE LIMITED

Applicant

AND

EE KUOH LAU also known as AUGUSTINE LAU

Respondent

Hearing:

On the papers

Appearances:

A L Kerr for the Applicant

No appearance for Respondent

Judgment:

20 February 2024

JUDGMENT OF HARVEY J

[Costs]

This judgment was delivered by me on 20 February 2024 at 11am pursuant to

Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/ Deputy Registrar

Solicitors:

Sanderson Weir Ltd, Auckland

SILVER HARBOUR CAPITAL TRUSTEE LTD v LAU [2024] NZHC 225 [20 February 2024]

Introduction

[1]                 On 10 January 2024, an injunction was issued restraining Ee Kuoh Lau (or Augustine Lau) from lodging any further caveat against the property, Record of Title Identifier 759183, following an application by Silver Harbour Capital Trustee Ltd.1

[2]                 By memorandum dated 2 February 2024, Silver Harbour now seeks costs on a 2B basis of $2,509.50 and disbursements of $250. Counsel submits that 2B costs are appropriate for this application, which was of average complexity but was urgent.

[3]Mr Lau has not filed any submissions.

Background

[4]                 In summary, Silver Harbour is a financing company. It provided a loan to One on One Property Development Ltd and Jiankang Li for over $25 million. The borrower’s property at 51A Murphys Road, Flatbush was accepted as security. The borrower defaulted on the loan. Silver Harbour exercised its power of sale. A third- party purchaser, Apec Equity Ltd, agreed to buy the property for $12.8 million with a settlement date of 16 January 2024.

[5]                 Mr Lau lodged a caveat against the property on 7 February 2023, which was removed by Associate Judge Brittain on 18 December 2023.2 He held, inter alia, that Mr Lau’s caveat was lodged in bad faith and was an abuse of process. Silver Harbour also applied for an injunction, which I granted with immediate effect. I took account of the applicant’s submissions that Mr Lau, as noted by the Associate Judge, had filed unmeritorious caveats on several other occasions and was a vexatious litigant.

Discussion

[6]                 Costs are at the discretion of the court.3 The general principle is that costs follow the event, meaning that costs are payable to the successful party.4 Costs should

1      Silver Harbour Capital Trustee Ltd v Lau [2024] NZHC 6.

2      Lau v Silver Harbour Capital Trustee [2023] NZHC 375.

3      High Court Rules 2016, r 14.1.

4      Rule 14.2(1)(a).

be determined, so far as possible, predictably and expediently, guided by the costs regime under the High Court Rules 2016.5

[7]                 Given that the application is unopposed, I find that the applicant is entitled to its reasonable costs and disbursements as sought.

Decision

[8]Mr Lau must pay Silver Harbour $2,509.50 in costs and $250 in disbursements.

Harvey J

5      Part 14; schs 2 and 3.