Stuart v Lightning Cleaning Services Limited

[2017] NZHC 2714

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2017-404-971 [2017] NZHC 2714

BETWEEN

GORDON JAMES STUART

Plaintiff

AND

LIGHTNING CLEANING SERVICES LIMITED

First Defendant

LUKE TIMOTHY ATTART Second Defendant

Hearing:	On the papers
Counsel:	D Chisholm QC for Plaintiff Second Defendant in person
Judgment:	7 November 2017

JUDGMENT OF WHATA J

This judgment was delivered by me on 7 November 2017 at 4.00 pm, pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Date: ………………………….

Counsel:            Burton Partners, Auckland

STUART v LIGHTNING CLEANING SERVICES LIMITED [2017] NZHC 2714 [7 November 2017]

[1]      In my judgment of 18 September 2017, I ordered costs on a 2B basis in favour of the plaintiff, Mr Stuart, on his application to appoint interim liquidators.1

[2]      I have before me a memorandum of counsel for the plaintiff, Mr Chisholm QC, in relation to the quantum of costs. He refers to the fact since my order, there has been an order for the appointment of liquidators, made by Toogood J on 18 September 2017, pursuant to which costs generally on the liquidation application were reserved.

[3]      The costs in respect of my judgment have been quantified and a costs memorandum of 22 September 2017 served on Mr Attard. I have checked the amount claimed and I am satisfied the sum sought is appropriate.

[4]      In respect of the appointment of liquidators by Toogood J, the plaintiff now seeks costs on that order against the first defendant only.   No response has been received by Mr Attard in relation to these costs claimed.

[5]      I can see no reason why costs should not be awarded in the usual way, given the plaintiff has been successful in all respects on the application for the appointment of liquidators.

[6]      Accordingly, there shall be:

(a)      an order for costs on a 2B basis and disbursements against the first and second defendants in relation to the application before me in the sum of $6,046.50; and

(b)an order for costs on a 2B basis against the first defendant relating to the appointment of liquidators on 18 September 2017.

1      Stuart v Lightning Cleaning Services Ltd [2017] NZHC 2254 at [32].

[7]      If the quantum of costs in relation to the appointment of liquidators cannot be agreed with the liquidators, they are to be fixed by the Registrar on the filing of a memorandum by Mr Stuart.