Chen v Auckland Weihao Investment Limited

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

CA646/2020
[2021] NZCA 657

BETWEEN	LIYUN CHEN Applicant
AND	AUCKLAND WEIHAO INVESTMENT LIMITED Respondent

Counsel:	Applicant in person D K Wilson for Respondent
Judgment: (On the papers)	3 December 2021 at 11.30 am

JUDGMENT OF MILLER J
(Review of Registrar’s Decision)

The application for review is declined.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

This is an application for review of a Registrar’s decision to decline to waive security for costs.
The Registrar’s decision was manifestly correct and I adopt her reasons. In short: the applicant can pay costs; because she has failed to pay costs ordered in other courts there is reason to think security is more than usually necessary to protect the successful party below; and the claimed public interest in the litigation is tenuous. I decline her invitation to speculate on the merits of the appeal but adopt (in her favour) an assumption that it is arguable.
The application for review is declined. Ms Chen must pay security for costs of $7,060 by 23 December 2021.

Solicitors:
Raymond S Walker, Auckland for Respondent

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Court of Appeal of New Zealand heard an application for review by Liyun Chen against Auckland Weihao Investment Limited regarding the Registrar's decision to decline a waiver of security for costs. Chen sought to challenge the decision, arguing that the requirement to provide security for costs would prevent her from proceeding with the litigation. The respondent, Auckland Weihao Investment Limited, defended the Registrar's decision, asserting that the security for costs was necessary to protect them from potential financial loss in case Chen was unsuccessful in her legal proceedings.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the Registrar's decision to decline the waiver of security for costs was manifestly incorrect. The Court needed to determine whether there were any grounds to overturn the Registrar's decision and grant Chen a waiver of the security for costs. The Court had to consider the applicant's ability to pay the costs, the history of Chen's failure to pay costs in other courts, and the claimed public interest in the litigation.

The Court of Appeal upheld the Registrar's decision, finding it to be manifestly correct. The Court noted that Chen had the ability to pay the costs and had a history of failing to pay costs in other courts, which raised concerns about her commitment to fulfilling her financial obligations. The Court also found that the claimed public interest in the litigation was tenuous. Therefore, the Court declined to speculate on the merits of the appeal but acknowledged that it could be arguable. Consequently, the application for review was declined, and Chen was required to pay security for costs of $7,060 by 23 December 2021.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established