Treneary v Treneary HC New Plymouth CIV 2008-443-386 [2009] NZHC 2622 (4 March 2009)

Last Updated: 31 December 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND NEW PLYMOUTH REGISTRY

_{CIV 2008-443-000386}

BETWEEN CHRISTINA JAN TRENEARY Appellant

AND MILES ARTHUR TRENEARY First Respondent

AND CHARLES BESWICK WILKINSON Second Respondent

AND ALYSSA TRENEARY Third Respondent

AND IVY MYRTLE TRENEARY Subject Person

Hearing: On the papers. Judgment: 4 March 2009

JUDGMENT OF ANDREWS J [Costs]

Solicitors:

Webster Holbrook, PO Box 33644, Takapuna, Auckland (K Webb) Catherine Quin, PO Box 3119, New Plymouth 4342

Counsel:

R T Wilson, PO Box 959, New Plymouth 4340

Copy to:

_{Reeves Middleton Young, Private Bag 2031, New Plymouth 4620}

TRENEARY V TRENEARY AND ORS HC NWP CIV 2008-443-000386 4 March 2009

[1] On 18 December 2008 I gave judgment allowing Christina Treneary’s appeal against a Family Court judgment. I directed that if costs were an issue, memoranda were to be filed.

[2] Christina Treneary has filed a memorandum dated 22 January 2009, in which she seeks costs totalling $7,225. This is the total of fees charged by her former solicitors, together with disbursements relating to photocopying bundles of documents, and her travel and accommodation costs.

[3] On behalf of the first and third defendants Mr Wilson opposes any order for costs. He advises that the third defendant, Alyssa Treneary, is legally aided, but he also records that the grant of legal aid is in the name of the subject person, Mrs Ivy Treneary. He says the reason for this is that aid was applied for “in a representative capacity”. It is not clear why this is so, given that counsel was appointed to represent Mrs Treneary.

[4] Much of what is set out in Christina Treneary’s memorandum is not relevant to the matter of costs. I have concluded that, to the extent that she is eligible, Ms Treneary is entitled to an award of costs on the basis of the general principle that costs should follow the event.

[5] However, as a lay litigant, Christina Treneary is entitled to costs, on the appropriate scale, only up until the time she ceased to be legally represented.[1]

[6] I was advised at the hearing that Christina Treneary ceased to be represented shortly before the appeal hearing. At the hearing she spoke to submissions prepared by her former counsel. Accordingly, Ms Treneary is entitled to costs on a scale 2B basis for steps 13-16 as set out in Schedule 3 to the High Court Rules. That is:

_{Step 13 Commencement of appeal: .5 of a day $800.00}

Steps 14 & 15 Preparation for and appearance at case management conference:

.4 of a day $640.00

Step 16: Preparation for appeal: 1 day $1,600.00

[7] Further, Ms Treneary is entitled to reasonable disbursements, as approved by the Registrar, in respect of photocopying the case on appeal, and the costs of travel and accommodation for the appeal hearing. Ms Treneary should submit a memorandum setting out the above costs and disbursements for approval by the Registrar. Any claim for disbursements is to be supported by the relevant receipts.

[8] In the light of Mr Wilson’s advice as to the grant of legal aid to Alyssa

_{Treneary, costs are ordered to be paid by the first respondent, Miles Treneary.}

Andrews J

---

[1] See Re. Collier (A Bankrupt) [1996] 2 NZLR 438 and Transit NZ v Cook HC Greymouth

CP6/93, 30 June 1994, Tipping J