Van Den Bogaart v Van Den Bogaart

[2025] NZHC 124

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2024-404-001975

[2025] NZHC 124

IN THE MATTER

of an application for an injunction

BETWEEN

GERARD FRANCIS VAN DEN BOGAART

Applicant

AND

FRANCIS ANTHONY VAN DEN BOGAART, GERTRUDE MARIA

EUGENIA MOULDEN and MICHAEL KAREL MARIA VAN EYK as
administrators of the estates of AMH and WH Van Den Bogaart
First Respondents

CHRIS LYNCH

Second Respondent

On the papers
Counsel:	Applicant in person, Rev A Waite as McKenzie Friend C Richardson for Respondents
Judgment:	12 February 2025

JUDGMENT OF ANDERSON J

[Costs on interim injunction application]

This judgment was delivered by me on 12 February 2025 at 3.00 pm pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules 2016.

………………………………

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors:      Inder Lynch, Manukau Copy to: The Applicant

VAN DEN BOGAART v VAN DEN BOGAART [2025] NZHC 124 [12 February 2025]

[1]                 The parties have not reached agreement on costs on the plaintiff’s unsuccessful application for an interim injunction. The plaintiff has advised that his memorandum of 3 December 2024, entitled “Submissions of the applicant to address omissions in the judgment,” is intended to also address the issue of costs.

[2]                   The defendants were successful in their opposition to the application. None of the issues raised by the plaintiff warrant a departure from the usual position that the successful party is entitled to costs. In particular:

(a)The terms of the plaintiff’s voluntary undertaking to the Court (excluding the defendants from persons he would pay reasonable costs to if these were incurred as a result of an injunction order) has no effect to exclude the plaintiff’s costs responsibility and liability to the defendants for his unsuccessful application.

(b)The application was not in the nature of a public interest matter that might potentially cause the Court to alter the usual incidence of costs.

[3]                 Costs on a standard 2B basis are appropriate. I order that the plaintiff pay costs of $5,616.50 and disbursements of $143.00, being the amounts set out at paragraph 6 and 7 respectively of the defendants’ memorandum.

Anderson J