VERENA COLLEEN RYAN ’ DIGBY JOHN NOYCE AND STUART JAMES LOBB LOCKHART TRUSTEE SERVICES NO. 56 LIMITED WAG TRUSTEES (2020) LIMITED

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2019-404-1591

[2024] NZHC 3206

BETWEEN
VERENA COLLEEN RYAN

First Plaintiff’

DIGBY JOHN NOYCE
Second Plaintiff

AND

STUART JAMES LOBB

First Defendant

LOCKHART TRUSTEE SERVICES NO. 56 LIMITED
Second Defendant

WAG TRUSTEES (2020) LIMITED

Third Defendant

Hearing: On the papers

Counsel:

L W Dixon for the First Plaintiff R Latton for the First Defendant

Judgment:

31 October 2024

JUDGMENT OF GAULT J

(Costs)

This judgment was delivered by me on 31 October 2024 at 4:00 pm pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules 2016.
Registrar/Deputy Registrar

……………………………………

Solicitors / Counsel:
Mr L W Dixon, Patterson Hopkins, Auckland
Mr H Thompson (for the Second Plaintiff), McMahon Butterworth Thompson, Auckland Mr R Latton, Barrister, Auckland
Ms G R Grant (Mr Lobb’s instructing solicitor), Grant & Co. Auckland

RYAN v LOBB [2024] NZHC 3206 [31 October 2024]

[1] In my substantive judgment of 19 July 2024, I indicated that Ms Ryan is entitled to costs on her application, and that my preliminary view was that Mr Stuart Lobb should pay 2B costs and disbursements and it may be appropriate for those costs to be deducted from the share of the Lothbury Trust remaining after resettlement.1 I urged the parties to take a reasonable and proportionate approach to finalising costs. The costs principles applicable under the High Court Rules 2016 are settled. They provide guidance to the parties to assist in the quantification of costs in a cost-effective way. I said that if costs could not be agreed, memoranda (not exceeding three pages) may be filed within 20 working days, and I would determine costs on the papers.2

[2]The parties have been unable to agree costs.

[3] Ms Ryan seeks scale costs of $19,837 on a 2B basis (but with 2C costs for one set of written submissions), and disbursements of $200.3

[4]No other party filed a costs memorandum.

[5] I consider that 2B costs are appropriate. The hearing was adjourned part-heard to allow Mr Lobb to file evidence, but the additional cost is addressed by allowing two claims for written submissions. Accepting that the time required may have exceeded the 2B estimate, I do not consider that 2C costs are required for the second hearing submissions.

[6] It is appropriate for the costs to be payable in the first instance from the funds remaining in the Lothbury Trust after resettlement ordered by Hinton J4 to the extent there are sufficient funds to meet such an order, essentially for the reasons given in my earlier judgment.

[7]The amount claimed for disbursements (excluding GST) is reasonable.

1      Ryan v Lobb [2024] NZHC 1997 at [83].
2 At [84].
3      She does not seek to recover all miscellaneous incidental disbursements totalling $524.96 (rather than the $589.96 stated).
4      Ryan v Lobb [2023] NZHC 689.

Result

[8]Ms Ryan is entitled to 2B costs and disbursements totalling $16,452.

[9]This award of costs is payable:

(a)in the first instance from the funds remaining in the Lothbury Trust after resettlement ordered by Hinton J to the extent there are sufficient funds to meet such an order;

(b)to the extent there are insufficient funds remaining in the Lothbury Trust to meet the award of costs, by Mr Stuart Lobb personally.

Gault J

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of New Zealand, Auckland Registry, heard a costs application in the case of Verena Colleen Ryan and Digby John Noyce against Stuart James Lobb, Lockhart Trustee Services No. 56 Limited, and WAG Trustees (2020) Limited. The primary dispute centred on the costs incurred by Ms. Ryan following a judgment in her favour. The case was presided over by Gault J, who was tasked with determining the appropriate costs to be awarded to Ms. Ryan.

The legal issues before the court included the determination of the appropriate scale of costs and disbursements Ms. Ryan was entitled to claim, and the allocation of these costs between the defendants. Specifically, the court needed to decide whether the costs should be classified as 2A, 2B, or 2C under the High Court Rules 2016, and whether any of the costs could be deducted from the remaining funds of the Lothbury Trust. Additionally, the court had to assess the reasonableness of the disbursements claimed by Ms. Ryan.

Gault J determined that 2B costs were appropriate for the proceedings, with 2C costs applicable for one set of written submissions. The judge noted that while the time taken for the proceedings may have exceeded the 2B estimate, it was not sufficient to warrant 2C costs for the second set of submissions. The court also ruled that the costs should be paid from the remaining funds of the Lothbury Trust to the extent those funds were sufficient, with any shortfall to be covered by Mr. Stuart Lobb personally. The judge found the claimed disbursements to be reasonable, thus awarding Ms. Ryan the full amount sought.

Ms. Ryan was awarded 2B costs and disbursements totalling $16,452. The court ordered that this amount be paid from the Lothbury Trust funds remaining after resettlement, with Mr. Stuart Lobb personally responsible for any shortfall.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

Hearing:	On the papers
Counsel:	L W Dixon for the First Plaintiff R Latton for the First Defendant
Judgment:	31 October 2024