Gerring-Gunn v Gunn

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA KIRIKIRIROA ROHE

CIV-2022-419-136

[2023] NZHC 2972

UNDER the Property (Relationships) Act 1976

BETWEEN

ANNA MICHELLE GERRING-GUNN

Appellant

AND

STEVEN ALEXANDER GUNN

Respondent

Hearing: On the papers

Counsel:

R P Sutton for appellant MIS Phillipps for respondent

Date of judgment:

24 October 2023

JUDGMENT OF JAGOSE J

[Costs]

This judgment was delivered by me on 24 October 2023 at 3.30pm.
Pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

…………………………
Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Counsel/Solicitors:
Richard Sutton, Barrister, Hamilton
Vicki Ammundsen Trust Law, Auckland

GERRING-GUNN v GUNN - Costs [2023] NZHC 2972 [24 October 2023]

[1] My 19 September 2023 judgment — upholding Anna’s appeals only on the issue of her liability for costs as an aided person in the Family Court, and essaying a preliminary view costs on the appeals should lie where they fell or fall given both Anna’s only partial success on the appeals and her status as an aided person — reserved costs for Steve’s claim.1

[2] Pointing out Anna was not an aided person for the purpose of her appeal, Steve claims $12,906 in 2B costs and $987.88 in disbursements on responding to the substantive appeal; he would allow Anna 2A costs of $4,660.50 and disbursements of
$540 on her success in the costs appeal. The net result is a claim of $8,693.38 by Steve of Anna. Anna filed no response either in terms of my timetable directions or as was indicated on the Registry’s subsequent enquiry.

[3] I accept Anna was not an aided person for the appeals. Steve’s approach is predictable and expeditious in determining net costs payable by Anna to Steve at appropriate daily recovery rates. I am satisfied the steps claimed also are appropriate.

[4]I order Anna pay Steve $8,693.38 in costs on the appeals.

—Jagose J

1 Gerring-Gunn v Gunn [2023] NZHC 2603.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, the case of Anna Michelle Gerring-Gunn versus Steven Alexander Gunn was heard and decided. This matter pertains to a dispute under the Property (Relationships) Act 1976. The appellant, Anna Gerring-Gunn, and the respondent, Steven Gunn, were involved in a legal battle primarily concerning costs associated with their appeals in the Family Court. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate allocation of these costs between the parties, taking into account their respective success in the appeals and the status of Anna as an aided person.

The legal issues before the court included whether Anna was correctly classified as an aided person for the purpose of her appeal, and if so, whether this classification would affect the costs awarded to Steven. Another critical aspect was whether the costs claimed by Steven were reasonable and justified, considering the nature and scope of the appeals and the daily recovery rates applied. The court had to balance the need for expeditious resolution of the matter with the principles of fairness and proportionality in cost allocation.

In delivering the judgment, Jagose J found that Anna was not an aided person for the purpose of her appeal. The court accepted Steven's claim for costs, noting that his approach in determining the net costs payable by Anna was both predictable and expeditious. Jagose J also found that the steps claimed by Steven were appropriate. Consequently, the court ordered Anna to pay Steven $8,693.38 in costs on the appeals. This decision reflects the court's careful consideration of the legal principles and the specific circumstances of the case.

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:	R P Sutton for appellant MIS Phillipps for respondent
Date of judgment:	24 October 2023