Rhind v Stevenson

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV 2022-404-000376

[2022] NZHC 2415

BETWEEN
CHERIE BERYL RHIND (previously known as CHERIE BERYL EDWARDS)

Appellant

AND

IAN LESLIE STEVENSON

Respondent

STEVENSON ACCOUNTING LIMITED

Second Respondent

Hearing: on the papers

Appearances:

M J Fisher for the Appellant N C King for the Respondent

Judgment:

20 September 2022

JUDGMENT OF TAHANA J

(Costs)

This judgment was delivered by me on 20 September 2022 at 4.00pm Pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules

…………………………

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors/Counsel:
Jones Howden, Barrister & Solicitors, Matamata Noel King Barrister, Auckland
Erskine Chambers, Auckland

RHIND v STEVENSON [costs] [2022] NZHC 2415 [20 September 2022]

Introduction

[1] The respondents, Ian Stevenson and Stevenson Accounting Ltd, seek costs from the appellant, Cherie Rhind,1 in relation to an appeal against the decision of Judge G M Harrison not to strike out Mr Stevenson’s amended claim to recover a debt owed by Ms Rhind.2 I dismissed the appeal.3

[2] The respondents seek costs of $13,434.00 calculated on a 2B basis. The appellant has not filed any opposition to the costs claimed.

Relevant law

[3] Costs awards are at the discretion of the Court.4 Rule 14.2(1)(a) of the High Court Rules provides the general principle that “the party who fails with respect to a proceeding… should pay costs to the party who succeeds.” This is the principle that costs follow the event unless there are exceptional circumstances.5

[4] In this case, the respondent was successful and it is appropriate that costs be awarded on a category 2B basis.

[5] The total amount of costs and disbursements of $13,434.00 are calculated as follows:

Item Particulars Allocated days6 Amount

53
Commencement of response to

appeal
0.5 $1,195.00

54 Case management memorandum 0.4 $956.00

55 Preparation of case on appeal 1 $2,390.00

56
Preparation of written

submissions
3 $7,170.00

1      Previously known as Cherie Edwards.
2      Stevenson v Rhind [2022] NZDC 3071.
3      Rhind v Stevenson [2022] NZHC 1594.
4      High Court Rules 2016, r 14.1.
5      Shirley v Wairarapa District Health Board [2006] NZSC 63.
6      Daily rate of $2,390.00 per day. See High Court Rules 2016, Schedule 2.

57 Appearance 0.5 $1,195.00

29 Sealing order for costs 0.2 $478.00

Total $13,384.00

Disbursements Amount

Sealing $50

Total $50

Result

[6] I order that the appellant pay costs and disbursements totalling $13,434.00 to the respondents.

Tahana J

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Rhind v Stevenson involved Cherie Beryl Rhind, previously known as Cherie Beryl Edwards, as the appellant against Ian Leslie Stevenson and Stevenson Accounting Limited as respondents. The respondents sought costs from the appellant in relation to an appeal against a decision not to strike out Mr Stevenson’s amended claim to recover a debt owed by Ms Rhind. The appeal was dismissed by the Court. The respondents sought costs of $13,434.00, which the appellant did not oppose. The Court considered the general principle that costs follow the event, unless there are exceptional circumstances, and determined that the total amount of costs and disbursements of $13,434.00 should be awarded to the respondents.

The legal issues before the Court were the principles governing costs awards and the appropriate basis for calculating the costs in this case. The Court referred to Rule 14.2(1)(a) of the High Court Rules, which provides that the party who fails in a proceeding should pay costs to the party who succeeds, and noted the daily rate of $2,390.00 per day as specified in Schedule 2 of the High Court Rules 2016. The Court found that the total amount of costs and disbursements of $13,434.00 were reasonable and appropriate.

The Court held that the respondents were successful in the appeal and that it was appropriate to award costs on a category 2B basis. The Court calculated the costs based on the allocated days and amounts for various items, including the commencement of the response to the appeal, preparation of case on appeal, preparation of written submissions, and appearance. The Court also considered the disbursements and sealing order for costs. The Court concluded that the total costs and disbursements of $13,434.00 should be paid by the appellant to the respondents.

In conclusion, the Court ordered that the appellant pay costs and disbursements totalling $13,434.00 to the respondents. The Court emphasised the general principle that costs follow the event and awarded costs on a category 2B basis. The Court calculated the costs based on the allocated days and amounts for various items and considered the disbursements and sealing order for costs. The Court’s decision was based on the successful outcome of the appeal for the respondents and the reasonable and appropriate calculation of the costs.

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
Appearances:	M J Fisher for the Appellant N C King for the Respondent
Judgment:	20 September 2022

Item	Particulars	Allocated days6	Amount
53	Commencement of response to appeal	0.5	$1,195.00
54	Case management memorandum	0.4	$956.00
55	Preparation of case on appeal	1	$2,390.00
56	Preparation of written submissions	3	$7,170.00

57	Appearance	0.5	$1,195.00
29	Sealing order for costs	0.2	$478.00
Total		$13,384.00