Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 9052944 — Unit Titles in Auckland Central, Auckland
Decided 4 Apr 2025 · Published 4 Apr 2025 · Application 9052944
Mixed / unclear
- Unit Titles
Order
of $11,049.06.
- He submits if the District Court’s scale costs regime were applied costs would be $7,162.50:
- If the Tribunal wishes to cross-check that award against the equivalent scale costs which might apply if the matter was in the District Court, the calculation is as follows: StepDescriptionTime Amount 4 2Statement of defence by the defendant (receiving instructions, researching facts and law, and preparing and serving that document
- 0 days$1910.00
- 1Prepare for mediation0.25 days$477.50
- 2Attendance at mediation0.5 days$955.00 12 Preparation of evidence and bundles for hearing
- 5 days$955.00 13 Appearance at the hearing (including preparation)
- 5 days2,865.00 Total3.75$7,162.50
- The costs award sought is higher than the scale costs calculation, but the difference is not significant and is justified given the unreasonable approach taken by the Body Corporate.
- Respondents seek an award of costs of $11,049.06. 11 See Body Corporate 346799 v Ikeda [2020] NZDC 3669 [5 March 2020] at [19]. Applicant’s submissions
- The Body Corporate submits that the Tribunal should “apply a more flexible approach, in reducing costs to a s scale of 2A instead of 2B under the District Court Scale, or not applying a scale at all.”
- The Body Corporate submits that the correct comparison to the District Court’s scale is in the order of $3,490.00: APPENDIX 1 Costs Calculation (Band 2A) under District Court Rules (comparable rate) No solicitor - $500 With Solicitor $1,910 StepDescriptionScale 2Time (Band A)Amount 2 Statement of defence by defendant (receiving instructions, researching facts and law, and preparing and serving that document $5000.75$375.00 12 Preparation of evidence and bundles for hearing $5000.5$250.00 13 Appearance at hearing (including preparation) $1,9101.5$2,865.00 TOTAL$3,490.00 Discussion
- The respondent’s actual costs are $12,246.00.
- Mr Rainey’s time attendances were about 26.4 hours. He discounted his usual fee rate for the majority of his attendances.
- The hearing took a little under one day.
- The case was relatively complex and raised novel issues.
- The quality of the respondent’s submissions and evidence was high and could only have been the product of many hours dedicated effort.
- Counsel’s attendances are in keeping with proper legal practice and “the realities of the legal market”. 12 The work was reasonably necessary, and the amount charged was consonant with applications for costs I typically encounter in the Tribunal, and reasonable in terms of conduct rule 9.
- I consider the respondents’ actual costs were reasonable. Therefore, in this case it is appropriate to use $12,246.00 as the starting figure from which to calculate what is a reasonable contribution to the respondents’ costs.
- The hearing took close to one day. The sum of money involved was initially $63,706.00, lessened to $23,657.96 shortly prior to hearing.
- The case was at least moderately legally and factually complex.
- The parties’ submissions were succinct and on point.
- The length of the hearing was shortened by sound pleadings and well-made submissions.
- The respondents were entirely successful in the proceedings.
- In my view, an order of costs at the rate of two-thirds of the respondents’ costs is justified. That amounts to $8,155.84.
- I have regard to the parties’ submissions on the District Court costs scale. I accept that the Body Corporate consider the District Court would have awarded less than half the amount I propose to order. However, I do not see any need to disturb the figure I have come to because when I stand back and look at the overall fairness and correctness of the figure, as against the scale result, I still consider it is apposite. R Kee 4 April 2024 12 Body Corporate 45131 v 88 Chi Ltd [2023] NZDC 9036, at [8].