IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY
I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE
CIV-2020-404-398
[2020] NZHC 2950
BETWEEN MARAETAI CO LIMITED
Plaintiff
AND
ZUO YAO YU
Defendant
Hearing: On the papers Counsel:
J Little for the Plaintiff
Judgment:
9 November 2020
JUDGMENT OF GAULT J
(Costs)
This judgment was delivered by me on 9 November 2020 at 2:00 pm pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules 2016.
Registrar/Deputy Registrar
……………………………………
Solicitors / Counsel:
Mr G Blanchard QC and Mr J Little, Barristers, Auckland
Ms D Marsden (plaintiff’s instructing solicitor), Alexander Dorrington, Auckland
MARAETAI CO LTD v YU [2020] NZHC 2950 [9 November 2020]
[1] Following my judgment of 3 November 20201 granting the plaintiff’s application to vacate the Court’s earlier order for specific performance, the plaintiff seeks costs on a 2B basis, totalling $5,736, plus disbursements of $500.
[2] The plaintiff is entitled to costs on a 2B basis. Those costs are limited to filing the interlocutory application and obtaining judgment without appearance, totalling
$2,151. In the absence of opposition, I do not allow for the preparation of written submissions. The disbursements sought are allowed.
Result
[3]The plaintiff is entitled to costs of $2,151 plus disbursements of $500.
Gault J
- AGLC
- Maraetai Co Limited v Yu [2020] NZHC 2950
- Case
- [2020] NZHC 2950
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court had to consider whether the costs claimed by the plaintiff were reasonable and necessary, and if they fell within the scope of what could be awarded under the 2B basis. The court also needed to decide if the preparation of written submissions constituted necessary costs, given that there was no opposition to the application. Furthermore, the court assessed the reasonableness of the disbursements claimed by the plaintiff. Given that the defendant did not oppose the application for costs, the court's reasoning focused on the reasonableness of the costs and disbursements claimed by the plaintiff, without the need to weigh arguments from both sides.
The court determined that the plaintiff was entitled to costs on a 2B basis, but these were limited to the costs associated with filing the interlocutory application and obtaining judgment without appearance. The court found that the preparation of written submissions was not necessary in the absence of opposition. Consequently, the plaintiff was awarded costs of $2,151, excluding the costs for preparing written submissions. Additionally, the court allowed the disbursements claimed by the plaintiff, amounting to $500. The total amount awarded to the plaintiff was $2,651.
The court ordered that the defendant, Zuo Yao Yu, pay the plaintiff, Maraetai Co Limited, costs of $2,151 plus disbursements of $500, bringing the total amount payable by the defendant to $2,651. This decision was based on the court's assessment that the costs claimed were reasonable and necessary, and that the disbursements were properly incurred in the course of the litigation.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.