Auckland City Council v Mawhinney [2014] NZHC 3316 (18 December 2014)

Last Updated: 23 December 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CIV-2013-404-4227 [2014] NZHC 3316

BETWEEN	AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL Plaintiff
AND	PETER WILLIAM MAWHINNEY Defendant

Hearing:	On the papers
Judgment:	18 December 2014

_{JUDGMENT AS TO COSTS OF THOMAS J}

This judgment was delivered by me on 18 December 2014 at 4.00 pm pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

_{Date:...............................}

AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL v MAWHINNEY [2014] NZHC 3316 [18 December 2014]

[1] By my decision dated 7 October 2014, I dismissed Mr Mawhinney’s

application for review of decisions of Doogue AJ.

[2] Paragraph 37 of my decision says:

There would seem no reason why costs should not follow the event on a 2B basis. If an agreement cannot be reached however, the Council is to file and serve a memorandum within 21 days of this decision. Any response from Mr Mawhinney is to be filed and served 14 days thereafter.

[3] I have received a memorandum of counsel for the Auckland Council. The Council seeks scale costs and disbursements on a category 2B basis, totalling $6,130. The Council has sought those costs from Mr Mawhinney but he has failed to respond to the Council’s communications. Mr Mawhinney has not filed a memorandum in response to that of the Auckland Council.

[4] I am satisfied that costs on a 2B basis are appropriate and they are awarded accordingly.

Thomas J